Latest news with #liquids
%3Amax_bytes(150000)%3Astrip_icc()%2FTAL-tsa-secutiy-line-TSALIQUIDBAN0725-b46af9b9f4b647db8c932e9af14d422c.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Travel + Leisure
19 minutes ago
- Travel + Leisure
TSA Hints at Ending 3-ounce Liquid Rule—Here's What Travelers Should Know
The nightmare of traveling with liquids could soon be a thing of the past. From making sure liquids are in the proper container and size to pulling them out of a bag when necessary, liquids can cause harrowing delays or even additional screenings. However, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem recently indicated the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) liquid rules may soon go the way of its shoes-off policy, which the agency ended earlier this month. 'But I will tell you, I mean the liquids, I'm questioning. So that may be the next big announcement is what size your liquids need to be,' Noem said during an interview at a summit with News Nation and The Hill. She added: "Well, hopefully the future of an airport where I'm looking to go is that you walk in the door with your carry-on suitcase, you walk through a scanner and go right to your flight.' When asked by Travel + Leisure to comment on Noem's remarks, the TSA left the door open to change. 'Secretary Noem and TSA are constantly looking for ways to enhance security, and improve the travel experience for the public,' a spokesperson for the TSA told T+L. 'Any announcements on policy changes will be made through official channels." Currently, the TSA requires travelers flying with carry-on luggage to limit liquids, gels, creams, pastes, and aerosols to 3.4 ounces or less and ensure they fit in a quart-sized resealable bag (with some exemptions for medically-necessary liquids, including breast milk and baby formula). Travelers may then need to take their liquids out and place them separately in a bin during screening. Travelers who are part of the agency's expedited security screening program TSA PreCheck are still limited to the 3.4-ounce liquid rule, but do not need to remove them from their luggage during screening. The TSA, however, has started rolling out new technology at airports across the United States, computed tomography, or CT scanners. These machines create a more detailed 3-D image during the screening process with the goal of allowing all travelers to keep laptops and liquids in their bags. The technology is also being explored across the globe in international airports, like the United Kingdom's London Gatwick Airport (LGW), according to TravelPulse Canada . But despite Noem's comments, it may be years before travelers can take large liquids in their carry-on bags—as in potentially not until 2040 when the TSA anticipates having CT units fully deployed across the country. The absolute easiest way to travel with liquids is to put them in checked luggage where there are no size limits.
Forbes
20 hours ago
- Politics
- Forbes
TSA Teases End Of Limits On Liquids In Carry-On Luggage
The Department of Homeland Security recently teased the idea of ending its limits of liquids passing through TSA airport security. getty Another major change may be coming to TSA airport security protocols as it considers ending another of its long-standing policies. Recently, the Department of Homeland Security teased the end of the limits on liquids coming through airport security, with Secretary Kristi Noem saying that she is 'questioning' the current limits on liquids and that a change 'may be the next big announcement' concerning the department's review of TSA policies. The statement comes on the heels of several other recent changes to TSA policies. For example, the department recently ended the requirement for travelers to remove their shoes, enhanced perks for military members, and created a dedicated family lane at security in select airports. No indication has been given as to what new rules might replace the current rules that are in place. Currently, the TSA limits the amount of liquid that can be brought through security in hand luggage to 3.4 ounces, and Noem did not specify how things would change. Would ending the policy mean that any amount of liquids would be acceptable? Or, would it mean an increase in the limited amount? The answer is unclear at the moment, as no further details have been provided beyond the tease. It's also possible that the rules go unchanged after further review. Noem wants new technology to fuel changes. Noem said that new advances in technology will hopefully change the way we view airport security in general, by allowing the TSA to maintain a high level of safety with less detailed rules and a more streamlined process overall. 'Hopefully the future of an airport, where I'm looking to go, is that you walk in the door with your carry-on suitcase, you walk through a scanner and go right to your flight,' Noem said. 'It takes you one minute.' The TSA's 3-1-1 liquids rule was originally introduced in 2006 (check out the full timeline here). The rule was introduced in response to an unsuccessful attempt by a passenger to detonate liquid explosives on a transatlantic flight. If a change does end up coming for the liquid limits, it will cement 2025 as a new era of TSA airport security, with two of its most long-standing measures —taking off shoes and taking out liquids—going by the wayside. For now, we wait and see.
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
New airport security upgrade could ease liquid restrictions — but there's a problem
Hopes are rising among air travellers that the long-standing restrictions on liquids in carry-on bags at US airports may soon be eased, a move that could alleviate the 'endless hassles' at security checkpoints. However, this optimism is tempered by a significant security concern: more than a third of all airports across the country have yet to upgrade their screening systems to reliably detect liquid explosives. While the inconvenience of discarding beverages and toiletries before security is a common frustration, the underlying challenge lies in differentiating innocuous items like hair gel from potentially lethal substances. This threat nearly materialised in 2006, when British authorities foiled a plot to detonate homemade chemical mixtures, disguised in sports drink bottles, aboard airliners. Security experts continue to express concern over the vulnerabilities exposed by that foiled attack. Recent remarks by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ignited the prospect for passengers of one day being able to fly with more than 3 ounces of their shampoos and gels, and avoiding the need to dispose of recently purchased drinks. 'The liquids, I'm questioning. So that may be the next big announcement, is what size your liquids need to be,' Noem said. 'We have put in place in TSA a multilayered screening process that allows us to change some of how we do security and screening so it's still as safe.' A Transportation Security Administration spokesperson said Noem and the agency 'are constantly looking for ways to enhance security, and improve the travel experience for the public.' New liquids rules aren't ready Any changes will come through the same official channels that TSA used to announce this month that travelers can keep their shoes on at checkpoints. That change offers relief from a rule adopted after 'shoe bomber' Richard Reid's failed attempt to take down a flight from Paris to Miami in late 2001 with a small explosive device hidden in his footwear. The limits on liquids were triggered by the 2006 UK arrests. Three ringleaders were eventually convicted. A massive surveillance operation Prosecutors told the jury in that case that authorities uncovered the plot after secretly searching the luggage of a man who was on their radar for security concerns after he returned from Pakistan and found the unusual combination of the Tang powdered soft drink and a large number of batteries, according to the BBC. That triggered the surveillance operation that eventually grew to include more than 200 officers. Agents discovered what appeared to be a bomb factory in a London apartment where odd devices were being constructed out of drink bottles. The plot didn't make sense until authorities discovered that the men were researching flight timetables and realised they were only trying to make an explosive big enough to rip a hole in a plane. The meaning of coded emails to contacts in Pakistan only became clear after the arrests, when authorities realised that the quantities of Calvin Klein aftershave being discussed in messages matched the amount of hydrogen peroxide the conspirators had purchased. Longstanding liquid restrictions Ever since then, the TSA and authorities in other countries have limited carry-on liquids and gels to 3.4 ounces (100 milliliters) because officials believe that amount is too small to create an explosion capable of taking down a plane. The restriction covered all types of liquids, because X-ray machines at checkpoints couldn't differentiate between explosive and harmless ones. The United Kingdom was planning to ease its restrictions last year to allow people to carry up to 2 liters (about half a gallon) of liquid, but that was delayed because several major airports still didn't have the new scanners that use computed tomography, commonly known as a CT scan, to produce clearer images. Advanced new screening machines The new machines allow screeners to switch between two-dimensional and three-dimensional images and turn them to see what may be lurking, said Johnny Jones, secretary treasurer of the chapter of the American Federation of Government Employees that represents TSA workers. 'It's just a totally life-changing situation,' said Jones, who has worked as a screener since the agency was created. 'It's a difference of being able to see something that would have been hidden by something that you can now see clear as day with the new technology. It eliminates the guesswork.' Many airports still use the old tech The problem is that only 255 of the 432 airports across the United States have new CT scanners installed, the interim head of the TSA told Congress this spring. The biggest airports got them first, but they are not expected to be everywhere until 2043. It's possible that a change in carry-on liquid policy could be implemented just at the biggest airports, but that could lead to confusion if travelers, are, say, allowed to bring full bottles on departure only to have them confiscated when they return. The scanners cost more than $2 million apiece, and they are so much bigger than the old X-ray machines that sometimes floors must be reinforced and checkpoints have to be redesigned. 'I think you need to hold off till we get more systems deployed. I think this one's a little too early,' said Jeff Price, who teaches aviation security at Metropolitan State University of Denver and has co-authored books on the subject. 'The keep your shoes on — I can get on board with that provided we continue to do random screenings. But the liquids, I think we're too early on that. There's other layers of security. Yeah, I know that. But not too many of them that prevent this type of attack.' In the past the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security has highlighted vulnerabilities in TSA screening that can allow things to slip through undetected. A 2015 report found that TSA officers failed 95 per cent of the time to detect weapons or explosive material carried by undercover inspectors. But Jones defended the work of the screeners he represents, noting that since the agency's creation, no plane has failed to reach its destination because of something that was missed. 'Nothing large has been able to make it through our system since we've taken over screening. We've protected the skies for 22 years,' Jones said. 'Even if you have a slight miss, it doesn't necessarily mean anything is going to happen on the plane.'
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
New airport scanners are better at spotting liquid explosives, but many airports lack them
Travelers celebrated the suggestion that American airports might soon ease restrictions on liquids in carry-on bags that create endless hassles at security checkpoints, but more than a third of all airports around the country still haven't upgraded their screening systems to reliably detect liquid explosives that could bring down a plane. It may be annoying to have to dump water and other drinks before going through security, but the challenge is to detect the difference between things like harmless hair gel and more sinister substances. The threat nearly materialized in an attack in 2006, when authorities in the United Kingdom arrested a group that was plotting to blow holes in airliners with a homemade mixture of chemicals in sports drink bottles. Security experts remain concerned about the vulnerabilities that were exposed by that plot. Comments this week by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem got travelers excited about the prospect of one day being able to fly with more than 3 ounces of their shampoos and gels and not having to throw out the beverage they just bought. 'The liquids, I'm questioning. So that may be the next big announcement, is what size your liquids need to be,' Noem said. 'We have put in place in TSA a multilayered screening process that allows us to change some of how we do security and screening so it's still as safe.' A Transportation Security Administration spokesperson said Noem and the agency 'are constantly looking for ways to enhance security, and improve the travel experience for the public.' New liquids rules aren't ready Any changes will come through the same official channels that TSA used to announce this month that travelers can keep their shoes on at checkpoints. That change offers relief from a rule adopted after 'shoe bomber' Richard Reid's failed attempt to take down a flight from Paris to Miami in late 2001 with a small explosive device hidden in his footwear. The limits on liquids were triggered by the 2006 U.K. arrests. Three ringleaders were eventually convicted. A massive surveillance operation Prosecutors told the jury in that case that authorities uncovered the plot after secretly searching the luggage of a man who was on their radar for security concerns after he returned from Pakistan and found the unusual combination of the Tang powdered soft drink and a large number of batteries, according to the BBC. That triggered the surveillance operation that eventually grew to include more than 200 officers. Agents discovered what appeared to be a bomb factory in a London apartment where odd devices were being constructed out of drink bottles. The plot didn't make sense until authorities discovered that the men were researching flight timetables and realized they were only trying to make an explosive big enough to rip a hole in a plane. The meaning of coded emails to contacts in Pakistan only became clear after the arrests, when authorities realized that the quantities of Calvin Klein aftershave being discussed in messages matched the amount of hydrogen peroxide the conspirators had purchased. Longstanding liquid restrictions Ever since then, the TSA and authorities in other countries have limited carry-on liquids and gels to 3.4 ounces (100 milliliters) because officials believe that amount is too small to create an explosion capable of taking down a plane. The restriction covered all types of liquids, because X-ray machines at checkpoints couldn't differentiate between explosive and harmless ones. The United Kingdom was planning to ease its restrictions last year to allow people to carry up to 2 liters (about half a gallon) of liquid, but that was delayed because several major airports still didn't have the new scanners that use computed tomography, commonly known as a CT scan, to produce clearer images. Advanced new screening machines The new machines allow screeners to switch between two-dimensional and three-dimensional images and turn them to see what may be lurking, said Johnny Jones, secretary treasurer of the chapter of the American Federation of Government Employees that represents TSA workers. 'It's just a totally life-changing situation,' said Jones, who has worked as a screener since the agency was created. 'It's a difference of being able to see something that would have been hidden by something that you can now see clear as day with the new technology. It eliminates the guesswork.' Many airports still use the old tech The problem is that only 255 of the 432 airports across the United States have new CT scanners installed, the interim head of the TSA told Congress this spring. The biggest airports got them first, but they are not expected to be everywhere until 2043. It's possible that a change in carry-on liquid policy could be implemented just at the biggest airports, but that could lead to confusion if travelers, are, say, allowed to bring full bottles on departure only to have them confiscated when they return. The scanners cost more than $2 million apiece, and they are so much bigger than the old X-ray machines that sometimes floors must be reinforced and checkpoints have to be redesigned. 'I think you need to hold off till we get more systems deployed. I think this one's a little too early,' said Jeff Price, who teaches aviation security at Metropolitan State University of Denver and has co-authored books on the subject. 'The keep your shoes on — I can get on board with that provided we continue to do random screenings. But the liquids, I think we're too early on that. There's other layers of security. Yeah, I know that. But not too many of them that prevent this type of attack.' Vulnerabilities in the TSA system In the past the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security has highlighted vulnerabilities in TSA screening that can allow things to slip through undetected. A 2015 report found that TSA officers failed 95% of the time to detect weapons or explosive material carried by undercover inspectors. But Jones defended the work of the screeners he represents, noting that since the agency's creation, no plane has failed to reach its destination because of something that was missed. 'Nothing large has been able to make it through our system since we've taken over screening. We've protected the skies for 22 years,' Jones said. 'Even if you have a slight miss, it doesn't necessarily mean anything is going to happen on the plane.'
Associated Press
2 days ago
- Associated Press
New airport scanners are better at spotting liquid explosives, but many airports lack them
Travelers celebrated the suggestion that American airports might soon ease restrictions on liquids in carry-on bags that create endless hassles at security checkpoints, but more than a third of all airports around the country still haven't upgraded their screening systems to reliably detect liquid explosives that could bring down a plane. It may be annoying to have to dump water and other drinks before going through security, but the challenge is to detect the difference between things like harmless hair gel and more sinister substances. The threat nearly materialized in an attack in 2006, when authorities in the United Kingdom arrested a group that was plotting to blow holes in airliners with a homemade mixture of chemicals in sports drink bottles. Security experts remain concerned about the vulnerabilities that were exposed by that plot. Comments this week by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem got travelers excited about the prospect of one day being able to fly with more than 3 ounces of their shampoos and gels and not having to throw out the beverage they just bought. 'The liquids, I'm questioning. So that may be the next big announcement, is what size your liquids need to be,' Noem said. 'We have put in place in TSA a multilayered screening process that allows us to change some of how we do security and screening so it's still as safe.' A Transportation Security Administration spokesperson said Noem and the agency 'are constantly looking for ways to enhance security, and improve the travel experience for the public.' New liquids rules aren't ready Any changes will come through the same official channels that TSA used to announce this month that travelers can keep their shoes on at checkpoints. That change offers relief from a rule adopted after 'shoe bomber' Richard Reid's failed attempt to take down a flight from Paris to Miami in late 2001 with a small explosive device hidden in his footwear. The limits on liquids were triggered by the 2006 U.K. arrests. Three ringleaders were eventually convicted. A massive surveillance operation Prosecutors told the jury in that case that authorities uncovered the plot after secretly searching the luggage of a man who was on their radar for security concerns after he returned from Pakistan and found the unusual combination of the Tang powdered soft drink and a large number of batteries, according to the BBC. That triggered the surveillance operation that eventually grew to include more than 200 officers. Agents discovered what appeared to be a bomb factory in a London apartment where odd devices were being constructed out of drink bottles. The plot didn't make sense until authorities discovered that the men were researching flight timetables and realized they were only trying to make an explosive big enough to rip a hole in a plane. The meaning of coded emails to contacts in Pakistan only became clear after the arrests, when authorities realized that the quantities of Calvin Klein aftershave being discussed in messages matched the amount of hydrogen peroxide the conspirators had purchased. Longstanding liquid restrictions Ever since then, the TSA and authorities in other countries have limited carry-on liquids and gels to 3.4 ounces (100 milliliters) because officials believe that amount is too small to create an explosion capable of taking down a plane. The restriction covered all types of liquids, because X-ray machines at checkpoints couldn't differentiate between explosive and harmless ones. The United Kingdom was planning to ease its restrictions last year to allow people to carry up to 2 liters (about half a gallon) of liquid, but that was delayed because several major airports still didn't have the new scanners that use computed tomography, commonly known as a CT scan, to produce clearer images. Advanced new screening machines The new machines allow screeners to switch between two-dimensional and three-dimensional images and turn them to see what may be lurking, said Johnny Jones, secretary treasurer of the chapter of the American Federation of Government Employees that represents TSA workers. 'It's just a totally life-changing situation,' said Jones, who has worked as a screener since the agency was created. 'It's a difference of being able to see something that would have been hidden by something that you can now see clear as day with the new technology. It eliminates the guesswork.' Many airports still use the old tech The problem is that only 255 of the 432 airports across the United States have new CT scanners installed, the interim head of the TSA told Congress this spring. The biggest airports got them first, but they are not expected to be everywhere until 2043. It's possible that a change in carry-on liquid policy could be implemented just at the biggest airports, but that could lead to confusion if travelers, are, say, allowed to bring full bottles on departure only to have them confiscated when they return. The scanners cost more than $2 million apiece, and they are so much bigger than the old X-ray machines that sometimes floors must be reinforced and checkpoints have to be redesigned. 'I think you need to hold off till we get more systems deployed. I think this one's a little too early,' said Jeff Price, who teaches aviation security at Metropolitan State University of Denver and has co-authored books on the subject. 'The keep your shoes on — I can get on board with that provided we continue to do random screenings. But the liquids, I think we're too early on that. There's other layers of security. Yeah, I know that. But not too many of them that prevent this type of attack.' Vulnerabilities in the TSA system In the past the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security has highlighted vulnerabilities in TSA screening that can allow things to slip through undetected. A 2015 report found that TSA officers failed 95% of the time to detect weapons or explosive material carried by undercover inspectors. But Jones defended the work of the screeners he represents, noting that since the agency's creation, no plane has failed to reach its destination because of something that was missed. 'Nothing large has been able to make it through our system since we've taken over screening. We've protected the skies for 22 years,' Jones said. 'Even if you have a slight miss, it doesn't necessarily mean anything is going to happen on the plane.'
