It's not just large amounts of liquids: it was my understanding that this is both a restriction on large amounts of liquid, but particularly on large containers needed for an explosive of sufficient destructive power.

You could always easily work around the liquid amount restriction (multiple containers over multiple people), but if you still need a large container, it becomes harder.

I don't know if this is true or if a resealable plastic bag also works, for instance (that would be funny, wouldn't it?).

▲

ascorbic 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This might make sense if there weren't shops selling large bottles right after security. Ones full of highly flammable liquids, even.

▲

hdgvhicv 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Or if you couldnt simply take a large empty bottle through.

Howver if you rely on 10 people to take 100ml each that’s a far larger conspiracy and far less likely than one person taking 1l through.

▲

chipsrafferty 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Like what? Alcohol isn't flammable unless it's over 63%, and you aren't allowed to bring duty free alcohol on the plane.

▲

decimalenough 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Duty-free purchases are all hand carried into the aircraft, and "tamper-proof" bags are nothing of the sort.

	▲	hdgvhicv 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Tamper evident, a very different thing.

▲

umanwizard 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Alcohol is flammable around 40%. French cooks aren’t using overproof brandy to do flambé.

Gunpowder doused in alcohol is, very famously for people interested in the history of rum, flammable if the alcohol is around 57.1% or higher, but straight alcohol/water without gunpowder is flammable at a lower strength than that.

▲

FatalLogic an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>particularly on large containers

It's common for people to carry large metal equipment cases (for cameras, etc.) onboard