Beware Of Taking Liquids In Hand Luggage!!!

Andy_L

patwa wrote: »

If they had staff that understood English fluently, this could have been very simply sorted out instead of the 20+ minutes it took arguing.

Did you not try talking loudly & slowly perhaps saying "Bloody Hell, Whats this Johnny Foreigner jabbering on about":rolleyes:

MoaningMyrtle

My hand luggage was recently double checked as they couldn't identify a specific item on the X-Ray. It turned out to be a (small) cake.:o :whistle:

Vampgirl

impy78 wrote: »

In case your case goes missing, which is becoming a more and more distinct possibility. I always put two pairs of pants and two t-shirts in, deodorant and wash things so I can be clean and fresh where ever I am.

I've never had my case go missing (or anything leak either) despite flying every couple of months for work, maybe if I'd had then I might be more bothered about it, I take extra medication in my handluggage but that's it - if the case goes missing then I'll use the hotel toiletries and go shopping for clothes (any excuse LOL). I can't stand travelling with a lot of hand luggage and if my luggage were to go missing it wouldn't be things like toiletries I was worried about :rolleyes:

Strepsy

I even packed my lipbalm in my hand luggage just in case. lol. Not worth the hassle.

moonrakerz

andrewmoorcroft wrote: »

I think you have missed the plot. You are saying essentially the same as me.

No, and yes !

Your original statement was that aircraft cabins are never pressurised, this is not the case.

One (of many) definition of pressurised is when something is under a greater pressure that the medium surrounding it.
Once an aircraft has passed 8000 feet (in a climb) the pressure in the cabin is greater that the outside pressure - therefore the cabin is pressurised. To keep the atmosphere breathable and conditioned, air from outside has to be pumped in to overcome the pressure differential.

I wouldn't argue over the bulk of your statement, it was just your opening statement that gave the totally wrong impression.

rjm2k1

After all the fuss about what you can and can't take on planes these days, I walked upto our rep on the way back from Greece earlier this year asking where I could dispose of the part drunk 1L bottle of water I had before I checked in, only to be told security don't bother checking anything! The reps said they have worked out that if you want to hijack a plane, just do it on the way home. Sailed through all the checks and nobody even batted an eyelid at my water!

peterbaker

Goodness Gracious Messrs Moorcroft and Moonrakerz!! And still neither of you got around to really teaching us why the shampoo leaks!:rotfl:

Move over and let me have a go

Now I think we are all agreed that because of the vagaries of Johnny Foreigners' airport security sub-culture, we are worried about moving the shampoo into the suitcases and then having it leak in the hold, right? That's 'cos we all know it does, or we know someone whose best frock / best T-shirt got stained forever ...


Now there's only two things that potentially happen to a shampoo bottle in a pressurised aircraft (and that's what they are called).... Actually it's three things if you include Murphy's Law:

1. The pressure outside the bottle goes down on the way up
2. The pressure outside the bottle goes up on the way down
3. Your bag containing the shampoo gets thrown around a bit by the handlers and may mean the bottle is upside down whilst 1. & 2. are occurring!

Now then, boys and girls, who can spot the problem?

Yep, it's number 1 and number 3 together conspiring
We can ignore number 2 for a moment because that actually might put the Genie back in the bottle if you are lucky!


So let's look at Number 1: It's a fact that if the bottles were completely full with no airspace inside then there would hardly be a problem. But Head and Shoulders always leave air in to catch you out!

Right then, safety belt on? Up we go. It isn't the pressure directly that is the problem, it's the fact there is already pressurised gas in the bottle. What? Yes, that air at normal pressure of about 1 bar. That's already pressurised when you buy it but Mr Moorcroft might take umbridge cos' it is contained in an equilibrium but don't let him wobble you! Down here at the surface, air is a gas under pressure (the weatherman's curvy lines tell you exactly what he expects it to be everyday!) and gases under pressure are always trying to expand. On the ground the air in the bottle cant expand even if you take the lid off because the air outside is at the same pressure, but give it half a chance and it'll muscle up to the containing bars and... and ...

Gases do this. Liquids don't.

Now then, as soon as there's a low pressure outside the bottle, that volume of air in the bottle is just aching to expand. Especially that fine muscular English air! Some of it will actually escape if it can be first out of the bottle. If it can't escape it will push the liquid to escape. How does it know its time to escape? Actually the liquid is minding its own business, more or less content to remain in its original volume. Trouble is if the lid isn't airtight, it's the liquid that gives the game away by moving closer to the escape route. The air molecules immediately wake up and nudge each other (hey hey boys, nudge nudge, we're on for an escape!) and they expand to fill that little space left when the liquid molecules all budged up a bit closer to the exit. If the pressure continues to reduce and push comes to shove, well you get the picture ... Note that no-one squeezed the bottle. In fact the very opposite to bottle-squeezing is occurring on the way up but we'll ignore that. It's that sniff of freedom that starts the leak.

So the main effect is the expansion of any air in the bottle causing the expulsion of any shampoo that gets in the way .

None of this would be a problem if the shampoo bottle was completely airtight and could withstand the pressure differential going up without exploding like the aeroplane did in Moonrakerz' pictures.

Fact is although the bottles can probably stand the pressure, the lids are notoriously not very airtight so whatever is nearest the lid is pushed out by the expanding air in the bottle. If the air is at the top of the bottle nearest the lid then that would be fine, but that's when Murphy's Law steps in courtesy of the baggage handlers for Murphy's airline and instantly that best frock or T-shirt are in mortal danger.

So as I've already said earlier in the thread, do wrap your checked in shampoo bottles tightly in knotted airtight/liquidtight bags (at least two for good measure), and then you are laughing. Because if any shampoo gets blown out on the way up, there's a good chance at least some of it'll get sucked (or should I say pushed) in again on the way down :T . But you'd better not rely on this last bit because of course the air that might or might not do the pushing on the way down will be some of that dodgy Foreign stuff, and we all know you never can tell what it'll do next

Now then Messrs M&M, any questions at the back?

hammy_the_hammer

plastic insulating tape around the lids , in a watertight toiletries bag , wrapped with a towel ...never a problem on any one of the hundreds of flights i have taken

Vampgirl

My little trick is to squeeze the shampoo bottle a bit to expel that pesky air that is prone to expansion...thus causing a vacuum inside the bottle at ground level. Which means that once up in the air the pressure inside the bottle will be roughly the same as the pressure in the hold (or maybe a little more or a little less depending on how much you squeeze! But at least there won't be so much of a difference and the volume of air available to expand will be less). Never had a spillage with this method.

The vacuum also has the benefit of keeping lids closed when cases are being thrown around by those luggage handlers (or ourselves lugging cases on trains, busses or in and out of car boots etc..)

moonrakerz

peterbaker wrote: »

Now then Messrs M&M, any questions at the back?

Yeah ! can you get shampoo in tablet form ?