On Feb 12, 5:58*am, Fly Guy wrote:
Was there such screening (like a metal-detection arch and x-ray scanner
for hand luggage) located right at the gate?
There were no metal detectors or x-ray machines for this security
check. We were told at the beginning of boarding the the US
governement had demanded additional screening, that we might have to
take off our shoes, and they thanked us in advance for our
cooperation. It was conducted at the entrance to the movable jetway
(int the "lobby" down the steps from the boarding gate) by humans who
rummaged through our bags.

Should passengers generally be aware of this prohibition?

If you are airside and as you walk around between the gates and the
retail stores, and you notice there is screening equipments located at
the gates (and the gate areas themselves are partitioned off as sealed
rooms) then I'd be very suspicious as to what I could buy in the airside
area and be able to carry with me to the plane.
There was no earlier warning. I thinkg the passengers would not have
been as annoyed if we had been given sufficient warning of the
additional restrictions so we could make some personal adjustments.

I don't travel to these wierd-ass places in asia to know what their
airside facilities and proceedures look like.
INC is a very modern airport, more up-to-date than SFO, SJC, or many
other US airports.

Or does this only apply to nonalcoholic beverages purchased from
the airside vendors, while the clearly flammable liquors and performs
purchased from the duty-free shops are allowed?

My guess is that they're implimenting a general "liquids" ban at the
gate, which makes no distinction between a glass bottle of liquor vs a
plastic bottle of water/juice/soda.
There were at least ten inspectors, all enforcing this beverage ban.
It probably was not the decision of a single agent., and looks like it
came from some higher authority. Unless there is some compelling
evidence otherwise, I am wiling to believe that it was probably at the
specific direction of the TSA; after all, losing our drinks was the
only visible effect of this security check.


bill wrote:
You were talking about India weren't you?

He was talking about his experience at ICN - Incheon (south korea).

The OP (jfeng) should be more clear as to exactly what he experienced.
I thought I was sufficiently exact and precise. If you have access to
the internet, translating the airport codes is not very difficult.
Also, I do not believe there are direct flights from India to SFO (I
know I could look it up, but I expect to be corrected if I am wrong).

The way I read the story, it sounds like people had their carry-on
searched (at the gate? *On the jetway?) while duty free was delivered to
them at the jetway in the normal fashion and they were allowed to bring
this on the plane.
Yes. I like to think that I write precisely (that is, little room for
misinterpretation of my intent).


The OP was wondering why a non-duty-free liquid beverage (presumably
non-alcoholic and therefore "non-hazardous") would be taken from them,
while the duty-free alcohol (possibly hazardous?) was allowed on-board.

My answer would be that consumable alcohol is not considered dangerous
and there is no distinction being made on that basis in this case.
Most hard liquors are flammable. Snootier restaurants sometimes do
this with desserts. Some people consumed all or parts of their drinks
in front of the inspectors, thereby demonstrating the potability of
the liquids.

The distinction being made is that duty free alcohol is more
"controlled" within the airside area, and is not in the possession
of the traveller until he's at the jetway.
In my original post, I meant to also say "perfume". I will blame this
on the spell checker.

That, plus there'd be a lot of really ****ed-off people if their duty
free was confiscated at the gate.
If they were to be logically consistent, the TSA could have instructed
the duty-free shops to process refunds for all of the purchases of
potentailly hazardous liquids and deliver those refunds on the
jetway. Of course, nobody ever accursed the TSA of being logical or
consistent. It really shows that they would rather **** off the
passengers than the owners of the duty-free stores.