Frank Slootweg wrote:

James Robinson wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Frank Slootweg wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

You can still carry cameras aboard on flights originating in
the USA. The only place in the world that restricts you are
flights originating in the UK.

I think you are mistaken. Our (August 12) newspaper had a
picture of (*TSA*) guards at Denver airport disallowing a bottle
of babyfood in passenger's carryon luggage. Last time I checked,
Denver was not in the UK (Well, at least the UK one doesn't have
TSA staff.).

Baby food is not a camera, which was the subject at hand.

I realize(d) that. My point is that it was at least implied that
only flight originating in the UK had/have restrictions. That's
clearly not the case. Also I don't see why a camera would be
treated differently than the other electronic items which
*were/are* banned. So I think it's safe to assume that, at least
for some time, cameras were banned also on flights which did not
originate in the UK.

Electronic items were not banned in carry-on bags in the US, nor are
they now banned. The only restrictions were on liquids/gels/pastes.
You could carry your cell phone, laptop, PDA, camera, etc. aboard in
your carry-on bags.

I was not talking about "in the US". I was and am objecting to your
"The only place in the world that restricts you are flights
originating in the UK.". That was just plain wrong, both for baby food
and cameras. Example of the latter: Passenger had to check in camera
on flight from Perth, Australia, via Singapore, to London. Yes the
*onward* flight was from London (to Amsterdam), i.e. "originating in
the UK", but with a *different* airline and the camera had already to
be checked in in Perth.

You have a strange way of pointing that out.

The original poster said that you couldn't carry cameras on board,
implying that it applied everywhere in the world. I pointed out that the
only place that restricted the carriage of cameras in carry-on bags was
the UK. You then brought up baby food in Denver, (assuming that the baby
hadn't brought it up first) which was clearly a non-sequitor.

You then mention that electronic equipment was banned, implying that such
equipment was banned everywhere. I then pointed out that the ban only
applied to flights originating in the UK, and used the US as an example,
which has no general ban on electronic equipment. (Many people at the
time this was posted thought they couldn't carry laptops aboard, even in
the US.)

Now you are saying that the ban applied to people who would be connecting
in the UK, which had nothing to do with baby food in Denver, and
certainly wasn't a general ban. It involved a route that would have the
passenger connecting in the UK, which does have the ban.

So what this all boils down to, is that at the time of the original
posting, cameras couldn't be carried aboard flights originating in the
UK. By extension, that included flights in other countries where the
passenger would be connecting to a flight originating in the UK. Cameras
were not a problem on other flights outside of the UK.

All of this is now moot, in that the UK permits a small carry-on tote
bag, and as long as your camera will fit in the bag, you can carry it
aboard.