What cheeses me off

[Pushka]

In my experience the person supervising allows all your trays/tubs to go together - so you can follow to one person. At least this is what I have experienced at SYD T3 and LHR.

With the really big tubs no one should need more than 2 (unless you are abusing the carry-on limits) - one for your regulation carry-on case and second fits both your personal item and jacket, as phones/tablets/laptops no longer need to be removed for those types of scanners.

ipads had to be removed in LHR last week. As did laptops.

 

[Lynda2475]

ipads had to be removed in LHR last week. As did laptops.

Maybe it depends on terminal - with the new scanners at SYD T3 and the LHR terminal used for my LHR-EDI flights lst August they yell at you not to take out phone, tablets and laptops.

 

[RooFlyer]

They’re usually quite big trays but the system quickly turns to cough with the kitchen sink brigade using 2 or more trays…

That would be me

 

[Vic]

What's the rule on those long moving walkways (travelators?) in airports?
Or does it depend on what country you're in?

the rule is WALK. no standing allowed.

lol

 

[CMA222]

the rule is WALK. no standing allowed.

lol

Unless you do not want to walk or cannot walk comfortably - then it is stand on the left in Oz.

 

[Pushka]

Maybe it depends on terminal - with the new scanners at SYD T3 and the LHR terminal used for my LHR-EDI flights lst August they yell at you not to take out phone, tablets and laptops.

Maybe that's a local UK flight so likely different. We used T4.

 

[Pushka]

Unless you do not want to walk or cannot walk comfortably - then it is stand on the left in Oz.

And on the right elsewhere in the world.

 

[Vic]

I'm going to guess all the cycling posts have been deleted.
At risk of being bad

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MINIMUM SPEED LIMIT. That's why there are overtaking rules.

RooFlyer's story above reminds me of Ticketek. Their "Ticket Insurance" to be precise.

[snip]

Long story short, Ticket Insurance is a scam.

Ticketek is a scam, fixed that for you

One of my offspring purchased 2 tickets via the official ticketek resale system for a pub gig. Get to the gig, and the venue is like sorry your tickets are not valid, we cannot find them. They let both of them in if on purchasing 1 new ticket, probably because she cried at the door. That was nice by the venue.

So I pursue teh refund. The only way to contact ticketek is email. NO phone number. I heard nothing sensible from ticketek, they said tickets never presented at the venue and venue said nothing. Ticketek refused to refund.
I contact the venue, the person remembers the whole thing, tells me she emailed off immediately to ticketek. Ticketek replied with information to say the venue was told the reference number for the first ticket sale. The resold tickets have a different reference number that was never given to the venue.

TIcketek F'ed it up, refused to refund, knew about the problem and the cause and the specific case. So I disputed with credit card.
Ticketek didn't care either. I gave them a chance to refund, and I would close the dispute. They just said nah do the dispute.

Unless you do not want to walk or cannot walk comfortably - then it is stand on the left in Oz

Disagree, that's when you book mobility assistance.

 

[Quickstatus]

We have cameras at our woolies that recognise what you've just put on the scales

We have them too. It also cheeses me off that that don’t work!

The camera is tucked in behind the screen.
Works for me. When it doesn't I take it off wait for it to reset then re present the item in a slightly different way
5 deep at assisted CO and similar at self CO but zero queues at S&G

 

[Lynda2475]

Maybe that's a local UK flight so likely different. We used T4.

This was T5 - they had just installed the new scanners etc

 

[blackcat20]

In my experience the person supervising allows all your trays/tubs to go together - so you can follow to one person. At least this is what I have experienced at SYD T3 and LHR.

With the really big tubs no one should need more than 2 (unless you are abusing the carry-on limits) - one for your regulation carry-on case and second fits both your personal item and jacket, as phones/tablets/laptops no longer need to be removed for those types of scanners.

Unless you're travelling with little kids, then you definitely need a few.
Thankfully the new machines mean we no longer need to fold the pram down and put it through.

 

[justinbrett]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MINIMUM SPEED LIMIT.

Yes there is.

Australian Road Rules (template for state rules):
Road Rule 125 – Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians – calls upon drivers to ensure they do not “unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or a pedestrian”. As such, a driver must not stop in traffic for no reasonable reason, nor should they drive “more slowly than other vehicles”.

Exact implementation differs by state, but it's there.
eg NSW -
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road to which a speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road

 

[Flashback]

This was T5 - they had just installed the new scanners etc

Definitely not the First Wing security then, or Fast Track, but which I've used in recent weeks. I'm usually 3 or 4 trays. Bag, backpack, liquids and 2x laptops. Always efficient though and often jump others with 1-2 trays who fiddle fart around.

 

[Lynda2475]

There was no priority screening or fast track operating. I had flown into T3 and transferred airside to T5, cleared immigration e-gates in a few seconds and then ushered into horrible chaotic queue. After 10 mins or so managed to queue jump and get upstairs via the supposedly not in use express path, but then another roadblock as no priority lanes, staff learning how to use the new scanners - would have missed my flight, had I not eventually convinced the line naz_ to let me skip ahead again.

When I went through T5 again a few weeks later was through a different entrance where priority was operating.

 

[Vic]

Yes there is.

Australian Road Rules (template for state rules):
Road Rule 125 – Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians – calls upon drivers to ensure they do not “unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or a pedestrian”. As such, a driver must not stop in traffic for no reasonable reason (a cyclist riding has NOT stopped in traffic), nor should they drive “more slowly than other vehicles”. (can easily overtake a cyclist = NOT obstructing)

Exact implementation differs by state, but it's there.
eg NSW -
A driver driving (So NOT a cyclist cycling) at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road to which a speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is no reason (is there no reason that a cyclist cycling cannot do 80 kph? Let me think) for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road

A rule about obstructing the road that is irrelevant to a cyclist. It sure as hell does not impose a minimum speed limit, unreasonably obstructing is the rule. Cyclists can easily be overtaken, unlike a car.

Read it again. I've emphasised a number of key words that you seem to have ignored. plus annotations in brackets.

 

[Lynda2475]

Cyclists can easily be overtaken, unlike a car.

Not always, occasionally a unfit cyclist rides in the middle of the bus lane on Paramatta Rd slowing down busses full of commuters and no the bus cant easily driver around them, without getting stuck in the gridlock. So there should be a minimum speed before you can ride on a main rd, is safer if the slow cyclist chooses the side streets

 

[cgichard]

Unless you do not want to walk or cannot walk comfortably - then it is stand on the left in Oz.

That would be me. What about at SIN and LHR?
Edit: sorry I didn't read the subsequent responses. I'm thinking in particular of the long travelators from T2 to the Central Coach Station at LHR. I don't know if mobility assistance extends that far.

 

[justinbrett]

A rule about obstructing the road that is irrelevant to a cyclist. It sure as hell does not impose a minimum speed limit, unreasonably obstructing is the rule. Cyclists can easily be overtaken, unlike a car.

Read it again. I've emphasised a number of key words that you seem to have ignored. plus annotations in brackets.

I'm not talking about cyclists - you flat out said there is no such thing as minimum speed limits without qualification.

Yes there is. The key phrase: nor should they drive “more slowly than other vehicles”.

In some countries (eg. the US), they actually signpost minimum limits.

You can't just drive 50Km/h below the speed limit because you feel like it.

 

[Forg]

You can't just drive 50Km/h below the speed limit because you feel like it.

I guess if you were technical about the wording, a (max) speed limit is the limit, no exceptions allowed; it doesn’t matter if it’s safer to travel more quickly, it doesn’t matter if it’s more fuel efficient, it doesn’t matter if getting somewhere more quickly is a life-or-death situation, that limit’s the absolute maximum allowed unless you’re one of The Exempted. The way it’s measured allows a bit of leeway in some states, but the limit’s still the maximum speed according to the law, the leeway’s only there to allow for potential inaccuracies in the measuring process/equipment.

Wheres the “lower limit” doesn’t exist as a limit per se, you‘re just not allowed to operate a vehicle on the road slowly without reasonable cause. Being a cyclist is one of those reasonable causes, if you were transporting someone to hospital where bumps in the road at speed were going to exacerbate their condition that’d be reasonable.

So if we were being cough about the wording, it’s true to say there’s no lower limit, but it’s not true to say you’re immune from Plod Prejudice &/or Random Road Usage Tax when travelling under the max limit.

Not in Straya at least. That minimum limit in certain parts of the US, I assume that’s a safety thing, like in rockfall zones … or is it just about stopping numpties from holding-up traffic?

That would be me. What about at SIN and LHR?
Edit: sorry I didn't read the subsequent responses. I'm thinking in particular of the long travelators from T2 to the Central Coach Station at LHR. I don't know if mobility assistance extends that far.

Not following the same rules as the local roads is rare, few countries do that; unless it’s signposted differently (which the London escalators are), in the UK slower pedestrian-traffic sticks to the left & hence on escalators/travelators you stand to the left.
An image search gives a result which claims to be at Heathrow, you can see 3 blue circles on the RHS down near the footway at the start of the travelator and one of those blue circles says it’s stand to the left. But I can’t really tell whether it’s actually a pic from Heathrow.

 

[justinbrett]

I guess if you were technical about the wording, a (max) speed limit is the limit, no exceptions allowed; it doesn’t matter if it’s safer to travel more quickly, it doesn’t matter if it’s more fuel efficient, it doesn’t matter if getting somewhere more quickly is a life-or-death situation, that limit’s the absolute maximum allowed unless you’re one of The Exempted. The way it’s measured allows a bit of leeway in some states, but the limit’s still the maximum speed according to the law, the leeway’s only there to allow for potential inaccuracies in the measuring process/equipment.

Wheres the “lower limit” doesn’t exist as a limit per se, you‘re just not allowed to operate a vehicle on the road slowly without reasonable cause. Being a cyclist is one of those reasonable causes, if you were transporting someone to hospital where bumps in the road at speed were going to exacerbate their condition that’d be reasonable.

So if we were being cough about the wording, it’s true to say there’s no lower limit, but it’s not true to say you’re immune from Plod Prejudice &/or Random Road Usage Tax when travelling under the max limit.

Not in Straya at least. That minimum limit in certain parts of the US, I assume that’s a safety thing, like in rockfall zones … or is it just about stopping numpties from holding-up traffic?


Not following the same rules as the local roads is rare, few countries do that; unless it’s signposted differently (which the London escalators are), in the UK slower pedestrian-traffic sticks to the left & hence on escalators/travelators you stand to the left.
An image search gives a result which claims to be at Heathrow, you can see 3 blue circles on the RHS down near the footway at the start of the travelator and one of those blue circles says it’s stand to the left. But I can’t really tell whether it’s actually a pic from Heathrow.

If we wanted to be cough about wording we wouldn't use the phrase minimum speed limit, because that's contradictory* (instead just minimum speed), but I think we all followed the intended meaning, that there is a minimum speed required on roads, and of course there are exceptions (just like there are exceptions with speed limits).

*If used in the context of traffic management / road design, a minimum speed limit would be the minimum upper speed limit for a certain context. Ie - the minimum speed limit to be used on freeways is 70Km/h. That's not a context the average public would need to use.