KathrynFlyingAway

Oh dear. I'm afraid this just helps me feel worried.

If you read the TSA website, and the interpretations of it given by people upthread, it says something very, very different. If you follow the instructions given by your superior, you will be spending time searching people and perhaps confiscating expensive ($30+) batteries from people who are carrying batteries that fully comply with the TSA rules. They may have already gone through other airports without problems, because, again, they are fully compliant with the rules.

As mentioned, Mr. FlyingAway carries a larger consumer camera ("pro-sumer") that can use up multiple batteries per day doing ordinary tourist photography. He is *not* a professional A/V person, but he does have 3 extra batteries for his camera. Each is far, far under the "8 grams equivalent." He also carries a battery that is critical for his medical equipment, as well as the others mentioned upthread.

These comply with all the rules, but it appears that you--your airport--would have a problem with him. That is not good.

peachfront

As my experience in Madagascar suggests, screeners can't comply with complicated rules re batteries. They don't know the difference between lithium, alkaline, Ni MH, and they sure don't have time to figure it out. They actually probably have a real job. So, yes, all of our batteries are at risk. And we who use pro-sumer cameras will probably experience the most seizures, because we don't have a job to point to as an explanation for why we're carrying the equipment. "I just want to" is no longer good enough in a world where freedom is considered disposable.

peachfront

No, it happened because pat-downs are free and expensive backscatter devices will bring in millions of dollars of pork to the manufacturers. And because stupid people fell into the trap. What will Ma and Pa Kettle say when images of their colostomy-bagged grandparents are splashed all over the internet, courtesy of an "escape" from one of the digital images caught at PHX or elsewhere? It won't matter, the cat will be out of the bag. The TSA has never stopped any "security measure" because of public outcry unless there was a financial benefit out there for someone. Pat downs are free. Flyertalkers are a sophisticated bunch, and I'm surprised that some of you didn't realize that.

A pat-down is FAR less invasive of my body than backscatter radiation plus digital image of what I look like without my clothes and even, in the case of implants, inside of my clothes. But the stupid people hollered for the more invasive solutiion, as they always do. The manufacturers of backscatter devices knew that they could count on the stupid people hollering. All you need is to wine and dine the right people in the government to get some weeks or months of mandatory patdowns, and voila...the people themselves will cry out to be financially molested and the proof placed on a digital imaging device, where in theory it might be erased, but where in reality at least some of the images will get out and float around the world forever.

There isn't a nice way to say it, so I'll just say it. For my size and weight, I'm busty. Therefore I got a lot of pat-downs. I'm confident that my ta-tas haven't yet asphyxiated anyone and that they are not WMD. So I would rather skip the patdowns and the X-rays, backscatter devices, etc. But, given the choice, a patdown is by far the better option than exposing my breasts to unnecessary radiation and providing a digital image that may, or may not, be erased, depending on the goodwill and judgment of someone I don't know.

A woman employee of the TSA allowed her backscatter image to be placed online showing the test of the device -- and her lumpy body and uneven breasts. That told me all I need to know about her judgment (bad) and self respect (zero). I wouldn't expect her to treat a stranger better or to even understand why some people hold their bodies to be something private.

chollie

I'm not feeling good about this. Our travel department has issued a warning/reminder that we are limited to 2 spare batteries in our carry-ons.

One of our folks was outbound to HKG yesterday. He's staying on for an extended vacation after his business is done. He'll be travelling in very rural parts of China. He carries three different Canon point-and-shoots. They 'allowed' him to choose which one of his three spares he could 'surrender' - an NB-5L. Not a cheap battery. TSO told him 'two spares'.

This was at SEA.

Lurker1999

It appears my prediction came early. Jan 2 and already the first blatant abuse of power by the TSA.

birdstrike

When I travel I usually check one bag, carry on one bag, carry on a photo backpack, and carry on a small fanny pack with documents, glasses and misc.

Looks like I can pack two spare batteries in each for a total of eight spares.

Lurker1999

Not if you run into the goon that chollie's coworker met.

birdstrike

I get the impression that chollie's goon was simply sniffing in one pack. I can always check dummy bags to get my spare batteries through.

chollie

I'm not sure how reliable that is. If I understand the new rules at all, they also apply (somehow) to batteries in checked baggage. My understanding is that batteries do show up fairly well on x-ray. If the baggage screeners see batteries in the checked luggage, will they be any better informed than the frontline folks about what's ok and what's not?

chollie

In fairness to the TSO's, I have to say that the rules are virtually incomprehensible. The rules, however ridiculous and inconsistently applied, should at least be clear and unambiguous. TSO is an entry level position - it's probably not fair to expect a TSO to be a rocket scientist. Likewise, there's no requirement (yet) that an air traveller be particularly well-educated, well-informed or even intelligent. I think most folks 'get it' (liking it is something else) about water, guns, knives. I can see nothing but confusion with the way the battery thing has been presented. I think my co-worker probably ran into someone who was trying to translate horribly written requirements into something simple and comprehensible - and, unfortunately, wrong.

birdstrike

AS I see it, there are two issues. Issue one is whether a specific battery is allowed. Issue two is how many batteries per bag are allowed.

Issue one seems to apply to big batteries, so I'm not too worried about the TSA confusing my camera batteries with those.

Issue two is just a matter of how many bags you need to fit the number of batteries you want to take and arriving in enough time to go through screening the requisite number of times. @:-)

I'm going to be traveling in some very cold and very photogenic places shortly, and I'm not going to let the fools at the TSA interfere with my photography efforts.

studentff

Sorry, but I don't give TSO's or their immediate leadership any leeway or benefit of the doubt here. The policy for battery confiscation should be that at a screening manager must sign off on any confiscation and when it doubt, let it pass. From the rules I've read, no pax is even at risk of violating the carry-on rules unless they are carrying more than 2 5+ pound Li-ion batteries (the super-duper universal batteries). Any other unauthorized confiscation should result in a written warning (1st offense) and immediate termination (2nd offense).

The NB-5L battery that was reported confiscated in the above post was less than 5 Watt-hours (they are 3.7 V and usually spec at 1.2 or 1.3 Amp-hours). The rules indicate there are no carry-on restrictions of batteries under 100 Watt-hours. This incident is only the beginning, and it is a nightmare.

Between my laptop, camera, cell phone, and GPS, I travel with a minimum of 7 Li-ion batteries, none of which costs less than $50 at a retail outlet like Best Buy (much cheaper online or at ebay, and of course I know that). The largest of the batteries is less than 75 Watt-hours.

If any TSO tries to confiscate any of them, I intend to raise as much ruckus as possible and file an attempted-theft or theft report with the nearest LEO.

TSAers here, I know you didn't make the policy, but you still need to tell your superiors that this is unacceptable.

The tyranny of the bureaucrats continues to worsen; the USA is more like the USSR or GDR every day. (For those who weren't around for the Cold War: tyranny of the bureaucrats == over-powerful central government giving low-level workers arbitrary and capricious power over the day-to-day activities and freedoms of law abiding citizens. It wasn't the politburo that oppressed the citizens; it was the endless maze of low-level government workers.)

vesicle

Agreed...this should be done (theft reports) in force by fliers for confiscations of ANY items not specifically prohibited.

A mass action like that will get someone's attention..whether or not it will result in change I do not know but as long as we keep standing by and taking it up the rear it will keep getting worse.

I know not everyone has the time but I always try to show up plenty early just in case this nonsense happens I won't be bothered by their threats of 'missing my flight' and I can deal with the issue...and it it goes smooth I can use my extra batteries to watch movies while waiting

rjque

Wait, so I now need a freedom baggie for my extra laptop battery?

chollie

Sounds like the directive APWGirl refers to is the same one the SEA TSO referred to when he insisted on confiscating the third spare camera battery. (There were three cameras and three spare batteries, one for each camera). The TSO said the carry-on limit was 2 batteries, period, no mention of size or distinction between lithium metal and li-ion.

Also no mention of a limit of 2 batteries per carry on bag or the my co-worker could have shifted the extra battery from his camera bag to his rucksack.