TSA is testing liquid-explosives detectors
First time here? Check out the site's "greatest hits" or read a random post from the archives. Feel free to ask a question, and consider subscribing to the latest posts via RSS or e-mail. Thanks for visiting!
I’m not sure why this isn’t getting more play, but the TSA is rolling out liquid explosives detection equipment at six airports. But don’t throw away those 1-quart plastic bags just yet. All the existing prohibitions on liquids, and all the procedures for bagging and scanning your 3-ounce liquid containers, are still very much in place.
This hit the news last week, but our inside man at the TSA nudged us out of complacency with this reminder:
On Tuesday (22/05), the TSA announced operational pilot testing at a number of large airports of the technology capable of screening sealed bottled liquids for explosives. The first unit ready for testing is the ICx Technologies Fido PaxPoint. Because the technology has performed well in initial testing, TSA anticipates deploying up to 200 bottled liquid scanners to the nation’s busiest airports by October. The device is currently being used by the U.S. government domestically and overseas, but this is the first time the system is being deployed in an airport environment. Bottled liquid scanners have been or will be piloted at Miami (MIA), Newark Liberty (EWR), Detroit (DTW), Los Angeles (LAX), Las Vegas (LAS) and Boston Logan (BOS).
The handheld ICx scanner can supposedly sense the presence of explosives or components for making an explosive device through glass, plastic, or metal.
I’m a little confused as to why these devices are being deployed, given the other restrictions that already exist on liquids. If 3-ounce bottles are deemed harmless, then a liquid scanner isn’t necessary. Or, if a liquid scanner is in place, then the 3-ounce limit on liquids would no longer be necessary. But why keep both?
Hopefully this test will prove successful and allow the TSA to eventually rescind the 3-ounce rule. I’ll happily offer my liquids for scanning, if that means I can carry a larger container on board.
Boston Logan Airport apparently got the first allocations of the scanners. Has anyone witnessed liquid scans in action? If so, hit the comments! Let’s hear about it.
Related:
- Japan and China introduce liquid-explosive detectors: Why can’t the US?
- Update: TSA compresses 100ml to 3.0 fluid ounces
- Are unlabeled bottles legal through airport security, and how do you deal with agents who make up rules?
- TSA apparently prefers its water in aerosol form
(image)


Subscribe to Posts by Email
June 5th, 2007 at 8:50 pm |
Why keep both?
Uh, layers of security?
Uh, finding exterior liquid explosives that our friends forgot to wash off when they packed their carry-on bags?
Uh, 12 Moroccan musicians traveling together, each with a few 2.9oz bottles.
Uh, why is that even the question?
More seriously, I’m impressed they got it all deployed that fast.
-TF
June 5th, 2007 at 10:05 pm |
Right NOW, it makes sense to have both layers of protection. but doesn’t the fact that we NEED a liquid sniffer imply that the x-ray scan of bags full of liquids is useless?
And dude, on behalf of Moroccan musicians everywhere, that wasn’t necessary.
June 5th, 2007 at 10:07 pm |
p.s. Yes, it is sort of impressive that they deployed this, but it’s just at Boston so far. And see the first “related” link. Japan already had theirs going last December.
June 6th, 2007 at 10:44 pm |
Well, it’s only both RIGHT NOW, as you say. If both layers get left on I won’t be surprised - easier to add steps to a process than take them out.
I like Malaccan Musqatel, er Morococcon Coconuts. You know what I mean.
-TF
June 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pm |
What S A said.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:08 pm |
Japan has how many airports and travelers?
Not surprised that they or the, say, French could deploy it first.
-TF
June 8th, 2007 at 12:33 pm |
[sarcasm] So up to now, the TSA has been just eyeballing our little baggies of liquids, and not *actually* making sure that nobody is carrying anything that could cause harm?
I’m feeling oh so safe. [/sarcasm]