Avoid Heathrow Airport in London UK at all costs

[willow]

marty m

You are quite correct in your evaluation of the UK. And that is from a UK citizen.

I have flown from London Gatwick, London Stanstead in the past year. I have also flown from London Heathrow previously.
My wife who holds a foreign passport and has the necessary visas and documentation    to enter the UK, always had a bad time with the rude immigration officials at Heathrow – who are a national disgrace – if I visited another country and I was treated like that, I would not choose to return – we did get a “lip service” apology from a supervisor, when I complained.
Also it’s a horrid place! So now we always use LGW for the long-haul flights between our respective countries.

Anyway,  
You must have seen the bins/receptacles to place your cabin baggage into for the limitations. I saw one man stopped from leaving (LGW) as his bag was oversize – so would not fit in. His protests that he had brought the bag INTO the country but couldn’t take it out fell on deaf ears - this is ALL conducted by BAA inspectors – those people are disgraceful too, not the police – though some of those are as well.
I had one holdall with 3 bags in it! –it weighed way over the 7kg limit! – Not taking chances - I had friends waiting by, that could take some things away, if need be.

Another stupid carry on policy is liquids.
You are not allowed over 100ml of liquid – in case you make a bomb! But not all terrorists work alone! – do the mathematics!  
Anyhow, I was stopped from progressing as I had a “toiletries bag”. So I had to return to the entrance to get a plastic bag to put the offending items in, for them to be inspected – but they were just x-rayed and that was it.
I kept the shaving foam though - kikashi

A bottle of soft drink is .75p outside the airport – inside its 1.35p. Before someone counters with this is due to rents, etc.  – The cost of magazines and papers is the cover price as well it seems is everything else.

There are “departure taxes” - £44 for economy class and £80 for business class passengers and even more for 1st class I expect – which goes to the government – which helps pays for the added police/security.


I have no wish to start a political argument either, and apologise to those I offend – but this is FACT.
Both Heathrow (Southall) and Gatwick (Crawley) have large Asian communities – this is because the local Authorities there, had to house refugees when they landed in the 70s. (The same way as Dover has east Europeans now)
It would be very easy for ANY sympathetic ground staff working there, or for those that work in the allied trades to assist in terrorism – are they so vigorously inspected?
This should not be read as a racist slur either, IT IS FACT.
It will not be long before a national newspaper reporter, gains access unchallenged

If you transfer flights in Dubai things can be worse – long waits in disorderly queues, then shoes, jackets and belts off with numerous trips through a scanner. Laptops booted to bios screen.  
On entering the UAE, you have to have an eye scan, to check (collect) your ID on a database.


MarkDS, summed things up remarkably well in his Jun 11 2007, 10:28 PM. post

– Hidden charges.

My last flights have been;
Ryanair
July 06 – LST (London) to RDZ (Rodez France) / 15kg + 10kg  Excess charge GBP5.50kilo
 (It took me over 1hr to get through the departure hall! So it was no surprise that some baggage was off loaded for late passengers – with no refund of their flight cost).
Easyjet
July 06 – CDG3(Paris) to LTN (London) / – 20KG and no limitation on cabin luggage (within reason)
Emirates
Aug 06–   LGW to BKK via DBX / Emirates – 30k and 12kg (I had silver award card then. - the scare, which has made things worse was a few days later)
Bangkok airlines
June 07 –THS to BKK / Bangkok airlines – 20kg + 7kg + onboard meal
Emirates
June 07 – BKK to LGW via DBX  / Emirates – 20kg + 7kg
July 07 -  LGW to BKK via DBX / Emirates – 20kg + 7kg

Ryanair used to weigh hand luggage too (do they still?), No other airline I have been on, does that.
At the same time they surcharge for anything and everything to make up for low-cost ticketing.


When in the UK I went to the Emirates airline office in London – as I wanted to exceed my allocated allowance on the return trip. I didn’t want to pay an extortionate rate at the airport, either.

I am glad I did as the charge was £35 a kilo! My return ticket was only £550 with a 20kg allowance – so work that out.
BUT - I can take a set of golf clubs with a pair of golf shoes.
Also 10kgs of scuba diving equipment may be carried free.



Emirates lost my luggage – (as the flight was re-numbered), when it did arrive - 3
NOTICE OF BAGGAGE LIABILITY LIMITATIONS
For most international travel (including domestic portions of international journeys) liability for loss, delay, or damage to baggage is limited by the Warsaw Convention or the Montreal Convention. Where the Warsaw Convention applies, liability is limited to approximately US$9.07 per pound (US$20.00 per kilo) for checked baggage and US$400.00 per passenger for unchecked baggage unless a higher value is declared in advance and additional charges are paid.Where the Montreal Convention applies, such liability is limited to a maximum of approximately US$1,375 per passenger for checked and unchecked baggage unless a higher value is declared in advance and additional charges are paid. For travel wholly between U.S. points, Federal rules require any limit on an airline's baggage liability to be at least US$2,500 per passenger where the Warsaw Convention is not applicable. Excess valuation may not be declared on certain types of valuable articles. Carriers assume no liability for fragile, valuable or perishable articles. Further information may be obtained from the carrier.

They gave me US$50 for 3 days in Bangkok – for clothes and sundries (luckily I live there).
I am now having to deal with them for the broken case.



A very unexpectedly informative travel site is the Samsonite travel page. http://samsonite.com/content/en/travelcent...Z142JUNB5H04WHI


Flying will always be a necessary evil.

I see the day where it will all be checked luggage, where sniffer dogs and machines will check for explosives and drugs. Gamma ray, back scanning technology will document and retain images of the contents of every case and bag.


As a “free” UK citizen, I expect I was under “observation” from the moment the vehicle I travelled to the airport in, passed the first CCTV camera, till I boarded the plane.

[jeremyrh]

marty m

You are quite correct in your evaluation of the UK. And that is from a UK citizen.

I have flown from London Gatwick, London Stanstead in the past year. I have also flown from London Heathrow previously.
My wife who holds a foreign passport and has the necessary visas and documentation    to enter the UK, always had a bad time with the rude immigration officials at Heathrow – who are a national disgrace – if I visited another country and I was treated like that, I would not choose to return – we did get a “lip service” apology from a supervisor, when I complained.
Also it’s a horrid place! So now we always use LGW for the long-haul flights between our respective countries.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree that LHR is awful - I think it is the worst airport I have used - and that  includes Mumbai :-)

But the worst immigration officials are without a doubt the ones in the US. They are the rudest, most unhelpful peoplpe on the planet. I have never entered the US without one of them being insulting in some way.

By the way - recently I flew from Providenciales, Turks and Caicos, and they were even X-raying peoples' flip-flops!!

[David Mantripp]

But the worst immigration officials are without a doubt the ones in the US. They are the rudest, most unhelpful peoplpe on the planet. I have never entered the US without one of them being insulting in some way.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123684\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd go for the British. And it is nothing new. The British "petty official" / "Little Hitler" is part of the culture. Always has been.  The US are a close second, but at least they've got some justification for being arrogant pricks.

[mauricio]

It's a shame that you forgot to comment about the pain in the ass that going through an american airport is for any person other than americans and canadians. I can assure you that it's a lot worse than for you to go through an UK airport or any other airport for that matter.

And honestly, all your message goes against what you said on your first one. You keep saying that your airline didn't let you know (and that's not Heathrow fault's for sure) and that you didn't check previously on United site. You also say that nobody checks. Well, I do.

Again...you may feel that the rule is stupid and it's your right. But you can't say that it's a secret rule as you say on your first post.

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.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Mark D Segal]

And honestly, all your message goes against what you said on your first one. You keep saying that your airline didn't let you know (and that's not Heathrow fault's for sure) and that you didn't check previously on United site. You also say that nobody checks. Well, I do.

Again...you may feel that the rule is stupid and it's your right. But you can't say that it's a secret rule as you say on your first post.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mauricio, Marty got caught-up in a situation he described very clearly which I think would have foxed any one. Recall, he wasn't even flying to Britain - he was going to Frankfurt and got switched at the last minute. You don;t expect someone who thinks they are going to Frankfurt to be all boned-up on the rules at Heathrow. Let's get reasonable here.

Reverting to the primary function of this website - photography - the up-shot of this whole discussion is that situation under the control of BAA is unacceptable to a whole class of travelers moving around with sensitive equipment and other needs that can't be accommodated safely within the existing rules. This group is going to have to lodge a lot of loud noise with BAA, the UK travel industry and relevant Government departments to get this turned around, to the extent of allowing more flexible arrangements targeted at these reasonable needs. This group of people is a niche market whose absence from the skies over Britain frankly will not likely shake either BAA, BA or the British economy. Put otherwise, I don't think this niche has enough economic clout relative to the huge numbers of ordinary travelers who want or need to go to the UK and can accommodate to the policy, inane as it may be to many of us.

Posting material of this kind on the web is one useful form of pressure for advancing the interests of the photographer community, but other more direct approaches to the concerned authorities will be needed to turn this around - if it can be - the pressures of commerce and security are powerful indeed.

[Stuarte]

Flying out of the UK has become a lot more tiresome.  I'm already bracing myself to go on vacation to the USA with wife and three kids in August - we'll have the pleasure of all the rigmarole leaving the Uk then the joys of standing in line at US immigration.

Last time I went through JFK I had a 1 hour 15 minute shuffle in line to get through immigration.  As the grumpy officer gave me back my passport he said: "spend some money while you're here."

[Paulo Bizarro]

I regularly travel with a Lowepro Minitrekker, where I carry my EOS 1V, 24-70L, and 70-200 f/4L zooms, plus flash and filters. Never had a problem. Perhaps using film is not that bad?

Anyway, if your backpack is overweight, just carry the camera over your shoulder. A photo vest is also handy, since if you carry the stuff in you, they can not do anything.

[jdyke]

I am a Brit and I flew out of Gatwick to Corsica a few weeks back.  Took my lowepro min-tekker without issue.   But as said many times in this thread - the one carry on rule still applies (inluding at Corsica coming back).  This IS a Europe wide rule and more airports are taking it on (not that I agree with it though!!)

Also Spain is likely to become even more of a headache as they now want personal details sent through of each passenger on the aircraft before they will let them through  (including other EU nations) as from next month.

As for the US....

The biggest problem is without a doubt imigration - you are treated like criminals - talked down to by quite rude unhelpful staff and it takes a proposterous time to get through.

To be honest I think its all gone a bit mad the World over.  Some addtional measure were necessary after 9/11 but some of the ones that are now in place serve no purpose other than to cuase maximum dissruption to the passenger.

Unfortunaley I don't see things getting better.....

[drew]

Oh dear, its all getting a bit out of hand!
Let's see, ...I will start with my own experiences. Ridiculously stressful check-in in LHR last November flying to China. Virgin wanted to charge me £37.00/KG for being overweight on hold luggage which would have worked out at about £350.00. After a lot of hard negotiating, we got this down to £79.00. Then there were two (yes two) lines of security staff to get through. The first line let me through after I told them that I was a professional photographer and I needed to carry two bags, but the second lot just would not let me through with two bags. In the end, with pockets bulging and one bag bursting apart at the seams we got through to the scanners where we waited and waited and waited in line (the scanner at the head of our queue had broken). After the shoe removal farce, we made the flight with just twenty minutes to spare.
OK, now the sense of proportion.....modern travel is generally a PITA. On the plus side, flights are cheap and we are all travelling far more than before. Even if the internet had existed thirty years ago, I doubt that there would have been enough people to contribute to this discussion. Also, I am concerned at all the nationalistic and even slightly racist comments that seem to be creeping in here. Paris CDG is poorly organised, Havana Cuba makes you wait in lines for ages for immigration, Orlando Florida feels like a mad merry go-round and some department of agriculture insists on scanning your hold baggage again (why???). In LA, some official deprived me of the little spanner for my Gitzo tripod (a friend and I had a good laugh trying to figure out how we could have used it to dismantle the plane). Delhi India is like a huge cattle market where the baggage handlers go on strike and if you fly Indian airways you better make sure you check-in at least four hours before, because they will bump you. Anyway, get the picture?
So, practical solutions:
1/ Carry on only one bag to the stated dimensions. Generally, you will get away with the weight, but it may be worth getting the policy of the airline before you begin.
2/ If your equipment will not fit in the one bag and you do not want to check it, put it inside your clothing, i.e. wear cargo pants and on your top half wear clothing with lots of large pockets. I did try a jacket from Domke, but it was hideous and in the end I opted for the much cheaper option of a jacket from an ordinary clothes shop with lots of pockets in it.
3/ Try to stay calm and relaxed. I am one of those fools who never worried about film and x-rays and I often check my laptop (always my tripod) into the hold. So far so good, but as somebody has said, 'sh1t happens'.

[Mark D Segal]

3/ Try to stay calm and relaxed. I am one of those fools who never worried about film and x-rays and I often check my laptop (always my tripod) into the hold. So far so good, but as somebody has said, 'sh1t happens'.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124115\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Calm and and relaxed - that is good advice - but as you say "shit happen" - after several times checking a laptop successfully, the last time I ever did that when I took it out of the suitacase and opened it up the screen was cracked in a nice spider-web pattern. So much for that laptop. Fortunately it was on the trip home.

Many airports in this world are dreadful, and more so than some of the ones that have been highlighted in this discussion. That doesn't make the latter any less obnoxious than they are, nor does it excuse the situation in countries with the resources and knowledge to get it right.

It is fine to be complacent about the workability of the current European rules - sure, there are always more and more cumbersome workarounds to more and more ridiculous regulations, and if we simply resign ourselves to be manipulated by these bureaucrats we will be manipulated - more and more. When something is foolish and inconvenient, unless people stand-up and say so, no effort will be devoted to achieving the same objectives in a more intelligent and sensitive manner.

[Steven Draper]

Lots of interesting stuff.

At LHR the folks at the xray machines do a good job, but its the 17year olds in New Hi Vis jackets, screaming their heads off about "liquids" as if they are in a market place that is just poor. I feel like a poor sheep being herded through.

The problem with security is that the security people we meet ARE NOT ALLOWED any discretion, and because everything needs to be kept very simple the rules are therefore very broad, and not flexible.

It is amazing that a musician can carry their instrument with them, but I cannot carry too much camera gear!

Most security staff are pleasant and reasonable, the states can be a bit tiresome!

Oh well, through LHR Term 3 tomorrow with my bulging Tamrac Wheelie flight bag!!! Wish me luck as I make my way home to Nova Scotia!

[drew]

Mark,
Why would anybody 'enjoy these limitations'? Where have I encouraged complacency? Why would I be happy with being ruled by petty bureaucrats?
Until the rules get changed (and I do not think long-winded replies on this forum are going to fix things overnight) I suggest (that is all) practical solutions. Perhaps you have John Rambo up your sleeve?

[mahleu]

It is amazing that a musician can carry their instrument with them, but I cannot carry too much camera gear!


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124143\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Modify a hard guitar case to hold you equipment and tell them that yes, it is your instrument which can create harmonious images and visual symphonies.

[Mark D Segal]

Mark,
Why would anybody 'enjoy these limitations'? Where have I encouraged complacency? Why would I be happy with being ruled by petty bureaucrats?
Until the rules get changed (and I do not think long-winded replies on this forum are going to fix things overnight) I suggest (that is all) practical solutions. Perhaps you have John Rambo up your sleeve?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124146\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your post read as if we should make-do with workarounds. Yes, we need to do that for the time being, but we should also be pro-active in trying to get a lousy situation improved. And you're right - long-winded essays in this forum won't BY THEMSELVES achieve anything; however things change as a result of ideas being generated, and voices being heard in the right places. No Rambos  - I just think traveling photographers need to make their needs and interests known in places where we may be heard, so hashing out the issues and ideas in a forum like this is a good place to start.

[dmg]

Since I was the original poster, I'd like to respond to some of my critics:

...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I travel due to my job. And every time I do I check the airport and airline regulations. I don't like to be surprised. European carriers are particularly picky about luggage restrictions. Some let you carry as much weight as you want, while others enforce its weight to the gram.

I had passed 3 times through UK airports since the 1 bag regulations took place.

It is really your responsibility to know and follow the rules, not the airlines, nor the airports. Many people travel with huge bags. I saw several being taken out of the line and force to check them. I don't sympathize with them. One woman was hysterical (and amusing) because she was worried she might lose her flight because she had to check in her bag.

And it is also your choice not to fly through UK airports, but sometimes that is not easy.

dmg

[Mark D Segal]

I travel due to my job. And every time I do I check the airport and airline regulations. I don't like to be surprised. European carriers are particularly picky about luggage restrictions. Some let you carry as much weight as you want, while others enforce its weight to the gram.

I had passed 3 times through UK airports since the 1 bag regulations took place.

It is really your responsibility to know and follow the rules, not the airlines, nor the airports. Many people travel with huge bags. I saw several being taken out of the line and force to check them. I don't sympathize with them. One woman was hysterical (and amusing) because she was worried she might lose her flight because she had to check in her bag.

And it is also your choice not to fly through UK airports, but sometimes that is not easy.

dmg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125105\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

dmg, did you read the initial conditions and situation Marty described? If you did, and you understood what he told us, I don't think you would be lecturing him about reading rules, and telling him about choices he didn't have at the time the incident happened. He was going to Frankfurt and got diverted to London when he reached the ticket counter to check-in.

Beyond his individual situation, there is a big general problem about rules that are (A) of questionable value except to the commercial interests of the people who motivated them and ( inconsistently specified and applied across the continent. It is making traveling, especially for people with gear, a living night-mare, and the ultimate solution is not to just sit back like a bunch of sheep reading all the fine print before we go to the airport - though until the traveling public exercises enough pressure on British and EU politicians to get it changed, fore-warned is fore-armed - that much I'll concede.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

For those of you who claim to have read the OP's messages as well as MarkDS's comments, and who still say "you should read the rules before you travel", I have one question:

Do you all read and seriously consider all of the details in all of the shrinkwrap EULAs on all of the software you buy?

In the case of the OP's situation, the only way he could have been covered by the "you should read the rules before you travel" notion is to have read the rules for every airline and airport in the world before buying a ticket. After all, you never know how you might get rerouted.

 

[Lisa Nikodym]

My complaint about Heathrow was that this was the first time I'd ever run into baggage policies set by the airport, not the airlines.  I had studiously researched the rules for each airline I was flying, but was unaware that airports could set their own additional rules too, and my airlines didn't tell me about it.  I've travelled plenty, and this is the first time I've seen airports with their own policies, beyond those of the airlines.  That's why I was unpleasantly surprised.

I'm not entirely blaming Heathrow.  More blame goes to the airlines flying through there that don't inform their passengers about Heathrow policies.

Lisa

[Mac Pizzle]

If you get a carnet, you can take two carry-on. Just present the carnet to security and they'll allow you to go through with your carry-on. Me and 2 assistants took 7 cases on the plane just one week ago.

[Mark D Segal]

If you get a carnet, you can take two carry-on. Just present the carnet to security and they'll allow you to go through with your carry-on. Me and 2 assistants took 7 cases on the plane just one week ago.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What is a "carnet" and who issues it?