Carry-on and luggage question

Two questions:

1. These days, with the extra security, will airlines (SQ, LH) allow me to
take my photographic tripod onboard as carry-on (a decent sized Manfrotto
tripod)? I have done this in the past, but not since August 2001.

2. Does anyone know of any official policy (from any airline) regarding the
carriage of empty fuel bottles for hiking stoves, in checked baggage or
otherwise. I have never had a problem, but a friend who I was meeting up
with was disallowed it by the check-in agent because it still had a residual
fuel smell (it hadn't been used for years, thre was no fuel in it, it had
evaporated long ago, but being a fuel bottle, of course it's going to have a
residual smell). This was Qantas (actually Qantaslink-Impulse) in January
this year at MEL. He went to the toiled to wash it and filled it with water
and brought it onboard as a carry-on and nobody cared - didn't encounter the
same staff member again. Was this staff member just being difficult or is
there something in airline policies about empty containers that may contain
vapours?


Thanks in advance

Leo H

"Leo Hamulczyk" <pagophilus@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:<dpdOa.229$fI5.9540@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
> Two questions:
>
> 1. These days, with the extra security, will airlines (SQ, LH) allow me to
> take my photographic tripod onboard as carry-on (a decent sized Manfrotto
> tripod)? I have done this in the past, but not since August 2001.

I've taken a tripod, including internationally. Problem being that
it doesn't mean some local goon on a power trip won't stop you. There
are stories galore of folks being stopped for things that are supposedly
allowed, and even when shown "the rules" stand their ground.

>
> 2. Does anyone know of any official policy (from any airline) regarding the
> carriage of empty fuel bottles for hiking stoves, in checked baggage or
> otherwise. I have never had a problem, but a friend who I was meeting up
> with was disallowed it by the check-in agent because it still had a residual
> fuel smell (it hadn't been used for years, thre was no fuel in it, it had
> evaporated long ago, but being a fuel bottle, of course it's going to have a
> residual smell). This was Qantas (actually Qantaslink-Impulse) in January
> this year at MEL. He went to the toiled to wash it and filled it with water
> and brought it onboard as a carry-on and nobody cared - didn't encounter the
> same staff member again. Was this staff member just being difficult or is
> there something in airline policies about empty containers that may contain
> vapours?


See above disclaimer. However, I've had alot of success with a flask
I carry, filled with Jack Daniels. Take some cheap vodka, rinse out
the container, and if stopped, tell them you carry booze in it but it's
empty right now. A sniff or two will have them thinking you drink
really bad vodka.

"The Bill Mattocks" <bmattock@> wrote in message
news:a534b8d4.0307071030.4c761e51@c om...

> Do you have some need to have your tripod with you, or can you check
> it? I would recommend checking it, as I would suspect that most TSA
> goons will see this as a 'dual use' object - ie, the legs can
> certainly be used as a weapon like a hockey stick, pool cue, baseball
> bat, etc (these are banned as carry on items).

I don't have a need for the tripod to be with me, however it won't fit in my
normal checked luggage. I could check it on its own. I can see that it would
make a great blunt weapon. There are some things, though, that I prefer to
have with me, but it's not a great issue for me. I'll see how I go and I'll
check it in if I have to.

> > 2. Does anyone know of any official policy (from any airline) regarding
the
> > carriage of empty fuel bottles for hiking stoves, in checked baggage or
> > otherwise. I have never had a problem, but a friend who I was meeting up
> > with was disallowed it by the check-in agent because it still had a
residual
> > fuel smell (it hadn't been used for years, thre was no fuel in it, it
had
> > evaporated long ago, but being a fuel bottle, of course it's going to
have a
> > residual smell). This was Qantas (actually Qantaslink-Impulse) in
January
> > this year at MEL. He went to the toiled to wash it and filled it with
water
> > and brought it onboard as a carry-on and nobody cared - didn't encounter
the
> > same staff member again. Was this staff member just being difficult or
is
> > there something in airline policies about empty containers that may
contain
> > vapours?
>
> My first question would be, of course, why would you need such a thing
> in your checked OR carry on luggage?

To cook on while hiking. It's common practice. Everybody with a liquid fuel
hiking stove will have one - ie a lot of backpackers and most people going
trekking. MSR, Primus, Optimus, SIGG etc, all common brands of hiking
stoves, have red aluminium bottles, usually between 0.3 and 1.5 litres for
storing fuel. You take it empty and buy fuel (unleaded gasoline, white gas,
avgas, kerosene, JET A1, even diesel for some stoves) at your destination.
It's more economical and cheaper than gas canisters and you can't get gas
canisters everywhere, whereas you can always get some sort of liquid fuel.
Thing is, even if they have been open for weeks and all residual fuel has
long evaporated, some smell might remain. If you wash it well enough, you
may or may not get rid of all the smell.

> But as to them being banned - while I am no fan of the TSA (as
> everyone here knows), I would not want you to be taking an empty fuel
> bottle as checked or carry on luggage on a plane if it were me making
> the decision. Fuel vapors can be much more explosive than liquid fuel
> (which normally has to be vaporized before it will even burn/explode
> anyway).

If the bottle had been sitting open for weeks so that all the fuel had
evaporated, would the residual vapour still be explosive?


> Frankly, I would not bring your fuel bottle in either checked or carry
> on luggage. I think it would be a bad idea, even if you managed to
> get it on the plane.
>

Judging by the number of backpackers and trekkers flying all over the world,
it mustn't be such a great issue.


Thanks for the input.


Leo H

"Leo Hamulczyk" <pagophilus@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:<00SOa.124$kh.7383@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>...
> > My first question would be, of course, why would you need such a thing
> > in your checked OR carry on luggage?

> To cook on while hiking. It's common practice. Everybody with a liquid fuel
> hiking stove will have one - ie a lot of backpackers and most people going
> trekking.

Ah. Not being a hiker/camper (beyond the Coleman stove & pup tent
variety), I didn't know that.

> If the bottle had been sitting open for weeks so that all the fuel had
> evaporated, would the residual vapour still be explosive?

I would tend to doubt it - a lit match would quickly prove/disprove
that theory (but I would not recommend that)! The real question,
then, is whether or not the TSA would consider it to be still
dangerous. And that, I'm afraid, is very much open to interpretation
by the individual TSA goon you end up standing in front of.

> Judging by the number of backpackers and trekkers flying all over the world,
> it mustn't be such a great issue.

Perhaps not - just offering an opinion by one who flies frequently,
not one who backpacks or has need of metal tubes which formerly held
liquid fuels.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks