Since I was the original poster, I'd like to respond to some of my critics:
(1) One referred to these comments as "half-assed" and said that there is no excuse for not being informed about Heathrow. In my case I was scheduled to fly to Frankfurt, originating on United out of Dulles. The lines were so long that business class travelers who arrived a full two hours early missed flights. United then changed my flight to go through Heathrow. United clearly saw that I had two carry-ons and didn't warn me. Unfortunately, because I am "half-assed," I didn't think about using my lap top while at the ticket counter, and connect to the internet to check Heathrow's policies, and not depart the United check-in counter until I knew for certain that two carry-ons were OK. (Because it was at that point that I needed to check my laptop and briefcase to avoid the hassle in Heathrow of having to check my second carry-on.)
But I am half-assed and gullible, so I assumed that Heathrow was no different from any other major airport. Silly me.
Ironically, now that I have checked the United web site, it does have a warning about Heathrow and London, but I was not warned by United, and had no way to check it -- not when I was suddenly changed to that flight and told I had 25 minutes to get to the boarding gate.
I don't know if all airlines now include a warning about Heathrow or not. United does. But it is just plain silly to suggest that travelers should be checking the web sites for both airlines AND airports. No one does that, nor should they be expected to do so.
Even if all airlines now post the info on Heathrow, it is clear that the news is not being clearly conveyed, judging by the results I saw as noted in #2 below.
Since Heathrow is so different from every other airport, the airlines also have a proactive obligation to warn passengers when booking flights. It wouldn't be that tough for United to include a "flag" in their reservation system for all agents to be told to warn passengers who are flying through Heathrow about this policy. That is clearly not happening.
Finally, since Heathrow is the single airport that is doing this, as noted in #7 and #8 below, it is still entirely valid to argue that if you must use two carry-ons, you must avoid Heathrow at all costs. And it is equally valid to argue that there are other airports, and other countries to visit, than Heathrow and the UK.
(2) The poster who described the small-minded British bureaucrats got it exactly right. I witnessed this policy applied against 15 or 20 people in less than ten minutes. And that is repeated dozens of times each hour, hour after hour, at Heathrow. The Heathrow fascist cops applied that policy to 80 year old women. I watched them do it. They even took away a cane from one old lady in front of me, and did not offer to get her a wheel chair, until the passengers surrounding her loudly complained in her behalf.
None of these passengers had any reason to be prepared for this, since they were ALLOWED to have two carry-ons on their ORIGINATING flights at other major airports on giant airlines. Regardless of what is or is not on the web sites of those airlines, they are allowing passengers to board flights that connect through Heathrow, and watch them walk on with two carry-ons. The passengers have no idea what is waiting for them in Heathrow with the zealous cops in that airport.
(3) As for liability, I believe that almost all airlines specifically waive ALL liability for photographic equipment. So we are expected to check camera equipment with no protection at all. Here is what is on the United web site:
"United is not liable for damage to fragile items, spoilage of perishables, loss/damage/delay of money, jewelry, cameras, electronic/video/photographic equipment, computer equipment. . . ."
So even if United is nice enough to warn us about Heathrow, they are turning around and telling us that if we check anything as a result of the Heathrow policy, we assume 100% of the risk. It would be more accurate for them to post a policy that says this:
WARNING!!! ONLY ONE CARRY-ONE ALLOWED AT HEATHROW. UNITED ASSUMES ABSOLUTELY NO LIABILITY FOR ANY CAMERA, PHOTOGRAPHIC OR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT THAT IS CHECKED AS A RESULT OF THIS HALF-ASSED POLICY AT HEATHROW.
(Sorry, I just couldn't resist the proper use of "half-assed" where it really belongs, and it is not on us.)
(4) Have you ever watched through the window, as the baggage handlers THROW suitcases onto the planes? Have you ever read the complaints, covered in major newspapers, of the increasing scale of thefts from checked luggage by TSA inspectors? Pro photographers who are concerned about theft and damage carry on camera gear, such as single camera bodies that can easily be worth $4,000 to $8,000. Only a fool would check a laptop that is vital for such photography and can easily be broken or stolen as checked luggage.
(5) One poster has frequently invoked the threat of terrorism, but he did not state that he is employed with any agency related to national security. He has as much claim to expertise on terrorism as any of us. And it defies all logic that it is more dangerous to have two smaller carry-ons, such as a small photo backpack and a briefcase, as one huge carry-on of maximum size. Any threat can be as easily carried in one huge think tank backpack as in two smaller carry-ons. So stop waving the the flag and wrapping yourself in patriotism and terrorism, unless you have clear expertise to tell all of us why common sense should not prevail.
(6) Finally, the tourist industry in Britain, fortunately, recognizes that is damaging the flow of tourists to the UK. An executive for one of Britain's top hotel chains sent me an email, and said that "as someone who flies out from the UK very regularly, I can only say I completely agree the policy is inconvenient, unnecessary and out of line with most other countries. We are told it is to allow thorough checks of hand baggage without introducing delays. But I can't say I find Heathrow any more thorough or more quick as a result. Furthermore, I agree that the rule becomes completely ridiculous when it comes to people changing flights in the UK and having to to put their second piece of carry-on luggage in the hold when they change planes. I know our trade association has been lobbying on this issue and I will check if there is any more we can do."
When it really impacts their bottom line, then they will scream even louder, and that is probably the only thing that will cause the petty bureaucrats in Britain to change the policy. I work in govt relations, and can testify that if you want to change a policy, you need to hit the incomes of those who have real clout -- you need them to complain and force a change in policy.
(7) The fact of the matter is that this is only happening at Heathrow. It is apparently a policy applied by the British govt for all UK airports, but the others have the common sense to ignore it. Again, according to the same hotel exec, as well as postings on other sites.
(
Ditto with other EU airports. This may be a EU policy, but based on the postings on this site, and reports from other business travelers, all other EU airports ignore the policy. Only the cops at Heathrow are enforcing this.
