Air Travelers Deal With Anti-Terror Restrictions

After nearly five years of heightened security at U.S. airports, American travelers seem to have adapted quickly and calmly to the new restrictions -- including a ban on most liquids and gels from carry-on luggage -- imposed Thursday after the discovery of the terror plot in London.

A survey by ABC News at five major airports just a day after the new rules found that the wait reaching security check points had returned to almost normal for domestic flights.

Saturday, anecdotal evidence indicated airport operations were even smoother, though there were bottlenecks at some airports, such as Los Angeles International and Denver, notorious for such slowdowns.

Still, there were few delays and cancellations.

At London's Heathrow, the busiest international airport in the world, there was a different story -- one of frustration for travelers and airlines. British transportation authorities have not only banned all liquids, but all carry-on baggage except for a few personal items such as passports, wallets, medicine and eyeglasses without cases, carried in clear plastic bags.

On Saturday, normally a busy day at Heathrow, the airport's management said security delays were four times as long as normal. As a result, officials said, security was unable to process everyone scheduled to fly. Airport management then asked airlines to cancel a third of their flights from already reduced schedules.

British Airways, the dominant carrier at Heathrow whose worldwide operations travel through its hub there, took the unprecedented step of criticizing the airport management for not being better prepared.

Some travelers were flocking to the Eurostar train that travels through the tunnel under the English Channel to Paris, hoping to make international connections there.

In the United States, meanwhile, the quick adaptation of American passengers may not be as remarkable as it seems.

The creation of the vast Transportation Security Administration after 9/11 has resulted in often swiftly changing, arbitrary rules and restrictions at U.S. airports that frequent travelers have had to accept.

For example, after shoe bomber Richard Reid attempted to blow up a transatlantic flight, all passengers had to remove shoes at security checkpoints. That was modified several times -- with TSA declaring at one point that shoes did not need be removed. Several months ago at Chicago's O'Hare Airport, TSA screeners told passengers they needn't remove shoes, but if they didn't they would be required to undergo a secondary security screening.

Then there has been the often flawed no-fly list that once almost prevented Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., from boarding a flight.

In what has been a difficult summer for air travelers because of packed planes, delays and long security lines, these new developments make travel even more frustrating. But there are some alternatives.

The first, of course, is simply to not carry on anything and to check all baggage. But that will not save much time in a security line.

A second alternative is to fly in first or business class. At major airports there are security checkpoint entries with shorter lines for passengers carrying those tickets.

Traveling to London, one alternative is to fly one of the two new all-business class airlines. Eos and MaxJet both fly to London's third airport, Stansted, which is 45 miles outside London but has convenient express train service to the financial district. Eos, which currently flies only from New York's John F. Kennedy Airport to London, and MaxJet, which flies both from JFK and Washington Dulles, are the only long-haul carriers using Stansted. Lines and delays at Stansted in these first days under the new restrictions have been minimal.

A less-likely alternative, for 99 percent of all travelers, is private aircraft.

So far, corporate and private planes have escaped the new restrictions. But only the very rich can afford a private jet. Fractional ownership runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and on top of that, operating costs can be $5,000 or more an hour.

One unaddressed worry among business travelers is whether restrictions will tighten in coming days in the United States. So far, carry-on baggage is still permitted, including laptop computers.

But Kevin Mitchell, head of the Business Travel Coalition, is concerned that the restrictions may expand to include laptop computers.

"That was unthinkable last week; it's thinkable this week," said Mitchell, adding that the loss of computers as a carry-on would be a disaster. Mitchell and others said such a ban would translate into a huge loss of productivity among U.S. business travelers.

One expert estimated for the Times of London that in the Britain alone, the banning of laptop computers will cost the economy more than $6 million.

Some aviation experts said the growing availability of high-speed Internet service aboard commercial airplanes could offer one solution if laptops were banned as carry-ons. On-board entertainment systems connected to the Internet could be quickly adapted to allow businessmen to use them just as they would their computers.

But that would still leave frustrating, computer-less time during all those airport waits caused by the new restrictions.