Three things are inevitable: Death, taxes and noise .

That being said, there are really levels of quietness and some places are nearly silent.

Probably some of the quietest place is the desert.

Camping in the desert affords remoteness from construction and there is little sounds of nature.

Remote islands are also an excellent choice.

Currently, I am in La Digue which has apparently less than 10 vehicles on the island.

There is not much wildlife either, so I pretty much here nothing most of the day and night except other tourists talking at the beach or in restaurants.

Even then, it never gets loud here.

There are plenty of vehicle-free islands around the world which can provide a very quiet environment, specially arid ones which usually feature less wildlife.

A jungle or cloud-forest lodge gets pretty quiet from human noises but the wilderness is alive at night.

I have had several stays in the Amazon and several jungles in Central America, and I can say that there are plenty of sounds at night when trying to sleep.

Except for howler monkeys of Guatemala, a good set of ear-plugs greatly helped.

For cities, it really varies

but I had great joy in spending time in pedestrian cities in Croatia.

Dubrovnik, Korcula, Split and Zadar all have pedestrian-only centers that are much more quiet than typical cities.

So much that when I reached Zagreb, it took my a while to notice why it was much more noisy there: motor vehicles.

Also those historic cties have very little construction going on since the buildings are already densely packed and kept for historical value.

Be sure not to choose a hotel near a disco, bar or the like, since that can create quite a racket that reaches a few buildings.

You would do worse than travelling to somewhere like Green Bank, West Virginia, which is in the middle of the National Radio Quiet Zone, where electromagnetic emissions are heavily controlled.

This means fewer cars, practically no mobile phones, no construction, no loud music (speakers bleed EM badly) etc etc.

While its a Radio quiet zone, this equates to a lot of things which make audible noise, hence my suggestion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Radio_Quiet_Zone

Many cities have laws regarding noise levels, but your definition of quiet is probably a lot more restrictive than what will be written into law.

There are many areas in the world that have banned vehicles (typically electric vehicles are permitted) and there is often an overlap between 'sleepy, rustic town' and these vehicle-free zones.

While that's not a cuarantee of quiet, it may be a start.

Try checking out the list on Wikipedia .

Speaking for the US, most, maybe all, municipalities have noise or general nuisance ordinances, however, I would not rely on this as any sort of guarantee or even expectation.

There will always be exemptions, especially during the day for normal activities such as construction or social events.

The physical location will be much greater determining factor, specifically the relative remoteness of the destination.

I have considered such vacations before and focused on the 'cabin in the woods' type location.

Death Valley.

This ad literally says "Quiet you can feel on your skin."

Absolutely North!

North/South Poles, Grenland, Iceland, Alaska.

Peace and quiet guaranteed.

Question: Assuming you want to take a several months long vacation from the noise of the city, are there cities, towns, countries even with laws that are enforced to keep things quiet? (i.e., no construction, no loud music, no idling of vehicles.)  Many places promote "peace and quiet" but do any have it written into their city's bylaws?  A Google search  comes up blank.

Possible to Travel to A Quiet Place?

You could travel to cities with pedestrian-only centres like Dubrovnik, Korcula, Split and Zadar, or find municipalities with noise or general nuisance ordinances, but these may not guarantee quiet. One promising location is Green Bank, West Virginia, which is in the middle of the National Radio Quiet Zone, where electromagnetic emissions are  heavily  controlled.

In terms of keeping things calm and quite there are a few laws that keep the peace such as, pedestrian only zones that can be found in Dubrovnik, Korcula, Split and Zadar, general nuisance laws that are inforced in most US municipalities and even national radio quite zones that can be found in Green Bank and West Verginia

Dubrovnik, Korcula, Split and Zadar all have special "pedestrain only" areas that control the overall noise out within the environment

In terms of the US most municipalities have general nuisance ordinances

Green Bank and West Virginia are in the middle of National Radio Quiet zones which keep loud radio and phone music to a minimum.


I can think of two reasons.

One, sadly, you have disallowed, which is the legroom answer.

But what if the answer actually is about legroom?

Since I don't have enough room for my knees, I have to straighten my legs, which requires me to put my feet under the seat in front of me.

It seems to me that if passengers were supposed to put bags under their own seat, people would be fighting over that space more than they already are.

The other reason is safety.

That space has a bar to keep the things in there from sliding forward in a crash.

This serves as a barrier between the space and the occupant of the seat above.

If the bar were at the back of the seat instead of the front, it would allow things to fly into the aisle between the rows, injuring passengers' feet or impeding their egress.

The gymnastics required to put your bag behind your feet in such a small space would be very interesting.

Bending forward and sliding it in, sure that works.

But pushing it back when you can't see and your legs are in the way?

Most people are not good at bending into pretzels in 31" of space.

Inconveniencing yourself never creates an argument.

Inconveniencing others, does however.

If you were to put your bag under your seat, you would be affecting the comfort of the passenger behind you.

That passenger may not even have brought a bag on board, but now finds their comfort dependent on the whims of the passenger in front of them.

I think it's easy to see what the result of this is: complaints, arguments, fights, passengers being thrown off the flight.

This does nobody any good.

The Life Vest Putting your bag underneath your seat could be an obstacle if you had to grab the life vest in case that there were troubles on the flight.

In the event of a crash anything on the floor will slide forward.

Having a bar at the front edge of your seat prevents bags from coming to rest against the seat in front and allows a clear space to evacuate your row.

If you are traveling in flight for longer journey then you will feel difficulty at your base in stretching your legs properly as the bags are already beneath everyone's seat..

safety is also the main reason behind this..if you put your bag below your seat then there is probable chance of stealing your bag with someone else and you will not even get any idea about this..

I think it's simply a lesser of two evils situation.

If the space is under the seat in front of you, you have the option to use it as storage or leg room.

If it's under your seat, there would be a bar at the back of every seat to prevent the bag from sliding into the passenger behind you.

With a bar at the back of every seat, no one gets any extra leg room.

I guess you could put your feet under your own seat in that case, but that doesn't sound very comfortable to me.

The current arrangement gives people the opportunity for a little leg room in the place that is most comfortable for most people.

Question: On airplanes, they tell you to put your bags either in the overhead or under the seat  in front  of you. Considering that the front row doesn't have a seat in front of them, and the back seats don't have anything under them, would it not be more efficient to have people put their backs underneath their own seats?  Please don't give me an answer about legroom. We all know airlines don't care about our legroom.

Why do airlines not have you put your bag underneath your own seat?

Legroom is a big reason, since you would be affecting the comfort of the passenger behind you if you could put your bag under your seat. This also reduces the chance of theft, as well as preventing the bag from flying forward in a crash or blocking the life jacket under your seat.

There are a lot of reasons that state this idea would be inefficent ranging from discomfort to safety hazzards. Examples include, a lack of leg room, holding uncomfortable positions for extended durations, theft and potential obstructions to life vests.

A lack of comfort makes this idea very inefficient. This stems from a number of reasons such as, lack of leg room, the inability to bend into a pretzel and maintaining awkward positions for extended lengths of time.

This idea can be a major safety hazzard for a number of reasons i.e in the event of a crash anything under your seat will slide forward, your bags could be an obstacle in the even you need to grab your life vest and there is even the potantial of theft.


Very near the site of the "Oldest Tunnel in the Oldest Underground in the World", in Rotherhithe in south east London, you can find the Brunel Museum , which, well, is not just 'a display' about his life and works, but an entire museum about his life and works.

The Brunel Museum is open every day 10:00 until 17:00.

[...] Entry to the Brunel Museum is £6 and £4 for concessions.

Children under 16 accompanied by parent or carer enter free of charge.

Entry to Great Eastern launch ramps is free.

Brunel Museum Railway Avenue Rotherhithe London, SE16 4LF

Telephone:

+44 20 7231

3840 Email: info@brunel-museum.org.uk

In terms of a comprehensive museum, not yet.

However, if you are travelling in 2018 (or reading this reply in the future) then there will be a new museum called 'Being Brunel: the national Brunel project' opening in Bristol in a year's time.

The ss Great Britain Trust has today been awarded £4.78m by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) for Being Brunel: the national Brunel project.

The new museum, set to open in Bristol early 2018, will celebrate and explore Brunel, one of the world’s greatest engineers and designers.

The attraction will feature galleries and interactive experiences set in reconstructed buildings that reflect the original Victorian waterfront panorama.

Brunel’s Drawing Office, a Grade II listed building, will be restored to become part of the new museum.

Link

You can read more about the project here:

@jl6's point in the comments is a good one, but deserves to be expanded upon

(Brunel has been adopted as a local hero in Bristol).

He's one of the few historical figures we've got who didn't directly get rich from the slave trade).

See for example Isambard Kingdom Brunel, famous engineer and his work at Bristol (local tourism/history site) for a few more things to spot on the way between the main sites.

The bridge has a visitor centre/small museum and tours , but unfortunately the limited tours of the vaults below the tower are mostly sold out this year.

Some of the best views of the bridge are from the western tip of Spike Island, only a mile on foot from the SS Great Britain.

Trains from London via Bath bring you into Brunel's Temple Meads station along Brunel's GWR , but you may want to take stopping services to see some of the key features along the way.

You can see what items of the Science Museum's collection are on display, and in which museums, using their collection search.

Putting in "Brunel" gets a few results, presumably as part of exhibits that discuss the man further. http://collection.sciencemuseum.org.uk/search?q=brunel

In Swindon, you can find the museum of the Great Western Railway of whom Brunel was a chief engineer.

As well as the story of the railway itself, it tells the story of how society thanks to the railway, and of Brunel's key role in the whole enterprise.

There's also the worlds oldest Wrought Iron railway bridge still in use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Railway_Bridge

Question: I'm travelling to the UK from Australia and wanted to visit a number of sites of scientific history.  One at the top of my list is Isambard Kingdom Brunel.  I understand there are  10 surviving structures  you can visit. I know you can visit  his ship in Bristol  - the SS Great Britain.   But can you visit a museum with a display about his life and works?  My question is:  Are there any museums or sites in England honouring Isambard Kingdom Brunel?

Are there any museums or sites in England honouring Isambard Kingdom Brunel?

Brunel Museum in London Is dedicated to his life and works.

The Brunel museum seems to be the best place to learn about Brunels work and life


Sometimes.

At least in the TSA Precheck lanes in the United States, the metal detectors (Precheck lanes use metal detectors, not body scanners) can alarm randomly to alert the screeners to perform a random check (you can read various anecdotal experiences in this forum thread ).

Some people report it happening frequently enough to them that they suspect it's less than random, though I know of no definitive proof of this, and the nature of random events is such that some people will feel singled out regardless.

In my experience, the TSA screener at the lane can tell the difference between an alarm caused by the presence of metal (they'll tell you to check your pockets or take off your watch or belt or whatever) and one caused by the randomizer.

In some cases, they'll stop you and tell you that it's random as you start to check your pockets.

If the random alarm goes off, they usually do a hand swab or a brief pat-down or some other additional check; I've heard of people getting sent to the body scanner as well.

While the exact configuration of airport security equipment is typically confidential information, it's not uncommon for the manufactures of walk-through metal detectors to offer an optional "programmable Random Alarm capability.

" In the case of one particular model , "Random alarms are indicated by a pulsed alarm audio and zone lights sequencing from top to bottom.

The likelihood of a random alarm can be adjusted on the control panel.

This is a definite yes.

If the metal detector beeps, turn around and you'll see "QUOT" for quota if you've been selected for random screening.

Edit:I paid particular attention to this on a trip this weekend.

The QUOT method was happening at LHR but in IST they had a triple beep and a strobing light.

When selected for random check they didn't wand the person at all, but just took hand swabs.

A small child was randomly selected and they just let him through without doing anything.

When the alarm went off for real, it was a single beep and a light indicated the location of the alarm.

If it was at foot level, they'd tell you to take your shoes off and put them through the x-ray, otherwise they'd wand they'd perform a hand search.

So if you're particularly observant you can probably tell by the beep, but if you don't catch that, you'll have a second or two to turn around and see the alarm indicator - real/random.

I cannot speak for other countries, but in Canada, the metal detectors used at the airports also beep randomly to indicate a further search.

Usually, they let the passenger choose between a pat-down, scanner, or swab.

Since the likelyhood of a scanned person carrying a forbidden object (like a knife or a weapon) is low, the most likely result of sitting hours watching a screen or a queue is boredom and loss of attention.

Therefore having the software randomly raising an alarm helps in keeping the personnel effective.

I remember reading somewhere that it also happen with hand baggage scanner.

Anecdotally (passing through a friendly airport at a quiet time -- UK) and setting a metal-detector arch off despite not having a scrap of metal on

me¹ I was told that they sometimes just go off.

The implication from staff was that they're set up to be so sensitive they sometimes alert for no real reason.

¹Shoes removed, even watch and wedding ring in my bag, and no metal in my body; I tend to fly in clothing with lots of pockets and no metal fasteners.

Technically, NO .

They do not sound a false positive.

What they do is sound an alternative alert to indicate the person has been 'selected' for additional screening.

For clarity, actual false positives can occur because the machine detected something or is not calibrated correctly.

Question: I've noticed that occasionally when passing through the metal scanners I am getting flagged despite not having a single metal thing on me. This usually results in a manual search or a hand swipe on one of the explosives detectors.   Is this being done on purpose to give an excuse for extra checks? Or perhaps the button on my jeans or some other tiny piece of metal is triggering the alarm?

Do airport metal scanners occasionally flash a false alarm on purpose?

There could be a false positive due to incorrect calibration or a notification to perform a random check, which can be adjusted to occur more or less frequently. If it is a random check, this may be indicated on the machine or you may be told about it.

In some cases the scanners are designed to randomly select individuals  to search and in others the scanners are designed to be so sensitive it picks up most  things, most of which may be irrelevant.

In some cases the scanners are designed to initiate random checks based off of a coded program or preset quota

In some cases the machines are extremely sensitive and do not sound off randomly, but are instead set off because something is detected


She should tell the truth, as being caught in a lie can have serious consequences, including being barred from the US.

The other thing she needs to do is have her story straight, and lots of evidence to back it up, as to why she will go home after 3 months and not stay illegally in the US.

This includes how she can take three months off from whatever she normally does back home.

I've had my (now wife) visit me several times.

I'm American, she is Irish.

She visited me at least 5 times, if not more, before we got married on official fiancé visa.

Sometimes I was with her coming over, sometimes she was alone.

Sometimes she was greeted with kindness, and others interrogated with malice (I was with her that time :/).

It's a coin-flip as to which your girlfriend will have.

These were all 90 day visits, same as you.

While I'd also suggest the truth as others here, I'll also throw in that she doesn't have to disclose all the details.

They might just raise more questions that are irrelevant to her coming for a visit.

As far as border folks are concerned, you are a US Citizen working in the US.

Period.

Mentioning recent relocation and all that will just prompt more questions.

They're looking at her and her intentions on coming over.

Will she take any American jobs, get on welfare, bring in extra family members, terrorism, etc.

In one of our visits, my girlfriend was taken into the little room, needlessly interrogated about marriage and future immigration which ended with the agent throwing the passport back at her saying "get out of here before I change my mind".

That situation prompted the getting officially married idea.

On that point, make sure she doesn't mention anything about getting married or being your fiancé; whether it's true or not.

You should definitely not plan on getting married this vacation, but anything said that might even hint at the possibility of an un-approved immigration or anything like that will cause delay and more questions.

Your relationship status should be private beyond that it actually exists.

So, to sum up: she is just your girlfriend.

She will be visiting you, an average working American Citizen for 3 months.

No plans for marriage, just having some fun spending money in America.

She has a return ticket booked for 90 days from then.

It's true info, and doesn't raise further questions to complicate the entry process.

Most border folks are grand, but often will start asking further when you mention irrelevant details.

Once, I messed up and mentioned a bottle of Absinthe I was brining back

(it was legal).

They had to go get my luggage and inspect the bottle while I waited for 45 mins only for them to say it was ok.

I should've just kept my mouth shut.

When I was a student I had an American girlfriend and my conversation lasted exactly 2 minutes every single time, so my first bit of advice is don't panic.

The questions I was asked were: Reason for visiting.

How long I was staying.

How was I able to get ninety days off work and how did I intend to fund my stay.

I answered truthfully that I was visiting my girlfriend, I would be staying for ninety days and as a student I didn't need to return to my studies until September.

I told them that as I was staying with her family my living expenses were quite low

but I had X amount available and a credit card.

They then waved me through without a backwards glance.

I should add that I entered the US three times like this in the summer, once in the spring and twice at Christmas over a four year span and never had a single issue.

There will always be a lot of horror stories

but when you read them they mostly come from oversharing.

I sometimes feel that border control is one of those occasions in society that us introverts get ahead!

At CBP, always speak the truth, because lies could bring anyone toward critical circumstances, if she don't have any wrong intention, she can explain her purpose of visit, sometimes CBP officers are nice too.

Good luck!

As noted by DJClayworth and others, the border agents are very concerned that her trip will not turn into an illegal stay.

For an example of a similar situation going poorly, and the reasons for it, see: http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/molly-hill-reveals-how-dream-trip-to-hawaii-turned-into-a-nightmare/news-story/b3833259e7ffe3e130dbf73c852f2f82

Some personal experience and a checklist of things you will want to have on hand (in order of importance).

I had a girlfriend visit me from out-of-country many times

and this was always what they were most interested in.

Proof you will leave the country.

Have copies of your plane tickets home or proof of purchase.

Carry cash or other funds on you (with proof if possible).

Try to have enough to cover your stay.

Know where you are staying, full address and who lives there (note:

a roommate who was not mentioned answering the phone and does not know is a big red flag).

Tell the truth, if they catch you in a lie it will be much worse.

Don't bring anything inappropriate across the border (as it might give them more reason to refuse entry).

Make sure your stories are straight and if possible be available for a call from the border agent.

They will sometimes call to confirm the story.

You don't need to, but cleaning out your phone/laptop of anything incriminating might be a good idea (as they can request to review it and read your messages/etc).

Question: I'm an American citizen and will soon relocate to the US for work. I currently work in Italy.  My girlfriend will come in September and stay 3 months with me.  What is the best thing for her to say to the border patrol when she comes over?

What should my girlfriend say to border patrol when visiting the US?

She should tell the truth, and be ready to explain how she can take this time off from her normal job and provide details of a return flight, but she does not have to volunteer all of the details without being asked, including about the relationship. In particular, she should avoid mentioning anything about getting married.

Telling the truth is the best way to get through the border, but it is ideal to have proof of your return trip as well aas keeping yourself from oversharring especially if the topic is marriage.

Telling the truth at the boreder is the quickest and easiest way to get through. Just don't be too over sharing as it could be problematic

Keep information about relationships to a minimum especially if it involves marriage. Then it may be best to avoid to topic completely

having proof of your return to your home country makes things a lot smoother


The most official source is the Umweltbundesamt (UBA), the Federal Environment Agency.

You can use the GIS website of the UBA , which provides nice PDFs of each Umweltzone.

Example: Berlin (Euro 3) .

There's a map of Germany as a whole as well.

A less official site, but with a much broader approach, is Urban Access Regulations , which collects more classes of restrictions in one place, but with a slightly harder to use interface and a much slower site.

Example: Berlin .

It also links detail maps, if provided by the municipality (example: Berlin ).

My first idea was to use OpenStreetMap, which also has a layer for the Umweltzonen , but the layer's proposal hasn't left the Draft status, so I wouldn't expect it to be complete.

Nonetheless, the tag appears on quite a lot of cities all over Europe, so you might give it a try, starting here (beware the Status column!) and clicking the number in the Link column to find the OSM detail map.

(Example: Berlin .)

Here is a map provided by the responsible German authority, the Umweltbundesamt .

If you are hiring a car in Germany and would like to know more, the car rental company will advise you further, either during the reservation procedure or upon arrival.

There is a user-made Google map with a clickable list of cities .

It would seem that the borders of the Umwelt zones are clearly defined.

For example, below is a screenshot of the zone in Bochum:

I just found this site that offers zoomable maps for all(?)

German environmental zones (need to scroll down to get to the Germany section):

You can enlarge each map by clicking the thumbnail on the top left corner on a subpage.

User hiergiltdiestfu already mentioned in his answer that OpenStreetMap (OSM) also contains so-called low emission zones (LEZ) which represent environmental zones.

While there seems to be no OSM-based map showing these zones you can use Overpass API and overpass turbo to create such a map on the fly: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/pI8

(the query will take quite a while to run) [out:json][timeout:600];( way["boundary"="low_emission_zone"]({{bbox}}); relation["boundary"="low_emission_zone"]({{bbox}}););out

body;>;out skel qt;

Note that the query will take some time to complete for large areas.

Also the map will be incomplete since not all low emission zones have been added to OSM yet.

You can eventually use the Umweltzone app for Android which I develop as an open source project since some years.

The app works both on tablets and smartphones.

Question: I occasionally need to drive into Germany for work and since I'm usually taking a rental car it can be  troublesome to obtain an Umweltzone sticker  while on the road. Therefore it is useful to know where exactly do all the Umweltzones begin and end.  Is there a comprehensive official map of all the German environmental zones?  There are websites  which list the cities where the Umweltzone sticker is mandatory, but their maps are not detailed enough to see the exact border of each zone.

Is there a map of all the Umweltzones (environmental zones) in Germany?

The most official source is the Umweltbundesamt (UBA), the Federal Environment Agency, which provides PDFs of each Umweltzone. Urban Access Regulations has more information, but is more cumbersome. OpenStreetMap has a proposed Umweltzone/low emission zone (LEZ)  layer, but this has not left the draft stage yet. Finally, there is an Umweltzone app for Android.

There are a number of ways to highlight Umweltzones both officially on the GIS website or on less official platforms such as OpenStreetMap, Google maps etc.

USB seems to be the most official site and online location to gain maps and information on Umweltzones

There seem to be a number of less official sites and apps to highlight umweltzones. A particular favourite being OpenStreetMap

OpenStreetMap contains Low Emission Zones and there is an Android Umweltzone App.


I have slept more times in the Yotel inside Schiphol than I would want to admit.

It's very very quiet.

You really can't beat an inside-an-airport hotel in terms of time to shower and bed after a zombie like shuffle off a transoceanic flight.

It's bliss.

And at Schiphol you are already inside security (!)

so you don't need to guess the right time to leave your hotel.

Not even the Gatwick or Heathrow Yotels are airside, nonetheless they are quite awesome especially the Gatwick one, the Heathrow one is in a far away terminal I somehow never land or leave from (uh, can you tell I have been to both... once or twice ;) ?).

There should be more capsule hotels airside, really.

Edit:

oh, Yotel agrees and they are expanding!

After too long, now there's one at Paris Charles De Gaulle (CDG) airport -- and it's airside, too although more restricted than the one at Schiphol due to the way the airport is laid out.

I suggest checking multiple reviews for any hotels you are considering.

Good soundproofing is a key feature for modern airport hotels.

If guests could not sleep because of noise it would be a very prominent complaint.

If you do go Air BNB make sure you are well away from the airport and not on any major flight path.

You cannot necessarily expect a house or apartment building to have as good soundproofing as a marquee airport hotel.

In April 2013 I stayed at the Schiphol Airport Sheraton, which is attached to the main terminal building and an easy walk to check in and the gates.

I was in a mid-level room.

It was very very quiet and I was able to sleep well there.

I'd like to promote Zach Lipton's comment to an answer.

Amsterdam proper is near Schiphol - about a 20min train ride from the airport station to the main Amsterdam station, with trains running regularly.

No problem at all bringing luggage on the train, and at the airport you can get a multi-day pass for unlimited train rides (includes other forms of transportation as well).

In Amsterdam, assuming you choose a "good" hotel, it should be as quiet as one

could reasonably expect in a city.

As yours is a common problem, most on-airport hotels in developed countries have very good soundproofing, as do many of the reputable brands in their near-airport hotels.

So I suggest that you initially choose your hotel on price and location, then check reviews and their own website before booking, for noise but also for anything else that puts you off (one related example of the latter: room temperature control.

Because the windows have to be sealed against noise, you have to rely on the air conditioning/heating, which can very from pathetic through noisy to fierce)

Writing about your situation rather than your specific question:

Schiphol is very well connected by train, and some hotels are close enough to train stations to make it worthwhile to also consider them instead of proper at-airport hotels.

I just made a random query on some website - if you go there and click on the map view you'll notice several options close to train stations.

You should not have a problem getting to the airport on time for your flight (and having enough time to sleep).

I will say that occasionally the security check and passport control lines can get pretty long, so you really should be at the actual airport at least 2 hours before the flight, perhaps a little more.

Question: We are visiting Amsterdam for 2 nights and will try to stay somewhere near Schiphol (if possible) to catch the 10 A.M. flight.  We can see quite a lot of marquee hotels near Schiphol with good weekend rates, but couldn't imagine how the noise level would be. A good night's sleep can beat anything, as long as we can get it. Does anyone have any experience staying near Schiphol? Do we need to seek Air BNB for saving ourselves some hassle?

Are Schiphol airport hotels noisy?

Schipol is very quiet and has several hotels on site as well as good train connections to others.

Hotels inside Schiphol airport seem to be very well sound proofed with some, such as the Sheraton, being within walking distance of the main terminal. Schiphol is also very well connected by train so it is possible to have a good experience outside of Schiphol airport and still make it back in time for your flight.

In airport hotels at Schiphol seem to have great sound proofing based off of other peoples experiences

The schiphol Airport Sheraton is very close to the main terminal building and is an easy walk to the check in gates

Schiphol is very well connected by train and some of the hotels are located quite close to the station so it would not be a problem to find accomodation outside of the airport and still make it in time for your flight


You shouldn't need it, and you might not even be able to:

Last time (that was with BA, and I believe it's been like that the last several times I flown with BA, and I've had similar experiences with other companies)

I was flying, I got an e-mail called "Your e-ticket receipt ...", which contained the sentence

Your ticket is held in our systems, you will not receive a paper ticket for your booking.

So it would have been quite hard to actually bring the ticket.

Of course you could bring that receipt, if you want something extra to document that you have booked a seat on that trip.

travel.stackexchange.com/users/44187/Henrik supports the community

Need it - not usually Want it (in case there is a question/query/whatever) -

yes

I'd suggest at the very least print it as a PDF and put it on your phone

- I once had luggage drop at Dulles get very stroppy with me when I couldn't show a ticket (having checked in online and printed by own boarding pass)

No, you don't need a ticket.

Your boarding pass and ID are all you need.

And, yes, you go straight to security.

You do not need to go to a ticket counter.

One less line to stand in :)

(I'm a former travel agent and frequent flyer.)

No, boarding pass is enough to pass security gates and board the plane.

It has been a long time since one needed a ticket to get on the plane.

However, I would bring either a printout or a copy on your phone (not merely accessible from your phone) in case of trouble, and if it's an international flight

it's possible an official will want to see evidence of a flight out of their country.

Paper tickets are no longer issued by any airline or travel agency.

Everyone has migrated to e-ticketing.

This means, you simply get a copy of your travel reservation along with a reference number;

based on which the agents look up your reservation in the computer systems.

Once you have been issued a boarding pass - for that leg of the journey you do not need to show a reservation copy.

However, you must at all times keep a copy of the reservation (what you get from the airline website in your email) with you at all times.

This is because: on the return leg of your journey, you will need this information either to print your boarding passes online, or at the counter when you are checking in.

At some airports, due to security restrictions, you may need to show this before you are even let inside the terminal.

it serves as proof that you have a return flight booked (for immigration)

in case your boarding pass gets lost or misplaced, you can use this copy to obtain a duplicate pass.

In addition to keeping a copy on your mobile device, I always carry a paper version; for those occasions when the mobile is not practical (ran out of battery) or a copy needs to be made of the booking details; or in some cases, where it has to be stamped separately (strangely only happened once to me in Asia).

So - to conclude: There are no more paper tickets.

Always carry a copy of your reservation with you throughout the journey.

Question: I have checked in online, I have my boarding pass and preselected seat. And I have no checked-in luggage so do I go straight to security check in. Do I need to bring my ticket along with the boarding pass printed at home?

Do I need tickets along with my boarding pass to board the plane

You do not need a ticket, and the boarding pass will be enough to pass security.

You shouldn't need a paper ticket to get through to your flight and if you have the boarding pass printed already you can skip the luggage check-in and go straight to the security gate

paper tickets are no longer needed to get on flights anymore

If your boarding pass is printed you can go straight through to the security gates


Look for the word "Kohlensäure", it's either on the front or in the list of ingredients:

Just make sure it's not accompanied by "ohne" ("without"):

First, carbonated is the standard in Germany, and that's what most people expect, so it would be the default assumption for something you see in the shelves.

Of course, it is written on the drink, but you need to be able to understand enough German to read it. '

Still ' is the typical term used in German for non-carbonated water-realted; if you see that, it will be non-carbonated. '

Kohlensäure ' means carbon dioxide, and if you see it, it is carbonated; typically in connection with the verb ' versetzt ', which means that the carbon dioxide was injected in the water.

There is no mechanical key or form factor that signifies it; many companies have carbonated and non-carbonated offers in the same bottles, with the same colors, with only different wording on the label.

In addition to points already mentioned, there is another indicator for plastic bottles:

Try to press and see how easily you are able to dent them.

The air in bottles of carbonated drinks is under pressure.

When you compare different plastic bottles of the same form factor, you will notice that you can tell by pressing them: rather compressible:

non carbonated drink rather uncompressible: carbonated drink

However, this is a method I learned as a kid and which I have rarely used since then.

Probably all the limitations noted in the comments below are valid.

There is absolutely no way that I know (native German) to tell without reading the label.

Bottles, colors of caps or whatever, I have never noticed any pattern that discerns carbonated from not carbonated drinks.

non-exhaustive list of indicators that you have a carbonated drink: mit Kohlensäure (anything)

Schorle (1) prickelnd / gespritzt (Austria, maybe southern Germany as well) sprudelnd

/ mit Sprudel (2) non-exhaustive list that indicated a non carbonated drink: ohne Kohlensäure still / natürlich Saft / Nektar (if there are none of the positive indicators)

There is also "medium" used on mineral water to indicate that it is a little bit carbonated (i.e. less than normal mineral water).

(1) where I come from (northern Germany), "Schorle" always means carbonated.

As comments on other answers indicate, in other parts of Germany it might not always mean that.

On bottles, however, I have not once anywhere in Germany bought something called "Apfelschorle" and found it to be not carbonated.

(2) this is rarely written, mostly used when ordering in a restaurant, i.e. "Wasser mit Sprudel, bitte" - "carbonated water, please" - or you could be asked "mit oder ohne Sprudel?" - "with or without carbonation?"

The name of the drink often shows if it is carbonated.

The drink on the image is named "Apfelschorle".

"Schorle" is carbonated juice.

"Apfelsaft" on the other hand is natural apple juice

(juice is "Saft" in German) without carbon dioxid.

For water Aganju said the important thing: Normally bottled water is carbonated in Germany.

If not it is usually labeled with "Still".

If it is carbonated you often find terms like "Kohlensäure" or "Medium".

Just a word of warning: if you really cannot abide carbon dioxide, "Still" is not even a guarantee for mineral water to be without carbon dioxide addition.

It's just less than in "Medium".

Turn the bottle on its head and look for bubbles.

"Naturell" or similar are safer in that respect.

Heavy glass in the "standard" deposit 0.75l bottle form is usually suspicious but it's not like plastic bottles cannot contain heavily carbonated water either.

If you order "water" without any qualifier, you'll get carbonated in a restaurant.

"Sprudel" or "sprudelnd" are the German words for "fizz" and "fizzy" respectively, so these too are worth watching out for (as well as the "Kohlensaeure" already mentioned).

Question: I have assumed that carbonated bottled drinks have the rugged base. But today I purchased a bottled drink in supermarket that doesn't have the rugged base, but it still was carbonated.   So I can't discern carbonated drink from the base of the bottle. How can I discern it then?

How can I discern if a bottled drink is carbonated or not in Germany?

The bottle design may not be different, but the words "Kohlensäure" (carbon dioxide), "Sprudel" or "sprudelnd" (sparkling) indicate that the drink is carbonated, while "medium" is less carbonated. "Schorle" is carbonated juice, but "Saft" is plain juice. "Still" is used for non-carbonated drinks.

Aside from reading the label for words such as; Still, Apfelsaft, Schorle etc. you can also check how the drink and bottle responde to certain stimulations like pressing against the bottle to check resistance levels and flipping the bottle onto its head to check if any bubbles arise to the surface.

In Germany you can tell whether or not a bottled drink is carbonated by its label. Words such as Kohlensäure, Apfelsaft, Schorle, Medium, Sprudel or sprudelnd all mean the drink is carbonated while as words such as; still, mean the bottle is un-carbonated.

Pressing against the bottle or turning the bottle onto its head are other ways you can find out if a bottle is carbonated or not.


TL; DR: Yes.

I grew up in Malaysia and I am a non-Muslim.

I have been inside Putra Mosque, in the capital city of Putrajaya.

It was part of a class field trip I had when I was in school.

However, you should pay close attention to etiquette and expected behaviors as outlined in your own answer.

The girls in my group wore long sleeves, and shawls to cover their hair.

Yes, non-Muslims are allowed to enter (at least some) mosques in Malaysia.

See user casvaart's answer for a local's perspective.

Having been in Malaysia, I can attest that visiting a mosque is possible for non-Muslims.

There were no restrictions as far

I could tell

and I have entered at least a dozen mosques principally around Kuala Lumpur

but also some in southern provinces.

In some cases, there were signs indicating not to take photos within the prayer hall itself but the outer part of the mosque can be photographed.

Generally yes, but you might be asked to wear appropriate clothing (e.g. no exposed skin).

But even then you might be given a gown to cover yourself with during your visit.

At least that was the case at Putra Mosque (seen here )

I can't speak for every mosque in the country but certainly from my experience of visiting a few mosques in KL and Malacca

it's a case of "Sort of".

The mosques all had visitor areas where nobody had any issue with me, a white guy in jeans and a plain t-shirt coming for a look around.

Signs said no shorts and no shirts with pictures of skulls (or other wild things) on them

but I encountered zero issue, they're used to tourists.

However...this was only to see a visitor area.

To go into the main part of the mosque itself where the worship takes place; the big two in KL had signs explicitly saying this was not allowed for non-muslims.

If I remember right the national mosque had set hours when non-muslims were allowed to take tours but generally it wasn't allowed.

Question: When I was in Morocco, I was disappointed to find out non-Muslims, in general, aren't permitted in mosques in the country, but I heard this isn't the case in some other countries. I'm headed to Malaysia soon and might want to step inside some mosques when I'm there.  Are non-Muslims permitted to enter mosques in Malaysia?

Are non-Muslims allowed to enter mosques in Malaysia?

You are allowed to visit many mosques, but you might be asked to wear appropriate clothing and may not be allowed in certain areas or at certain times.

Non-muslims are allowed into mosques in Malaysia to some extent, provided that they wear appropriate atire. Though they are usually kept way from the main worshipping area there are some cases where they can take a tour during certain times. An example of this can be found at the National Mosque in Malaysia.

Yes there are mosques in Malaysia that allow non-muslims to enter provided they wear appropriate atire.

In most cases the main part of the mosque is off limits to non-muslims, howevere there are some instances where non-muslims may take a tour of the main area during certain hours i.e the national mosque in Malaysia


There is no such device because what you are proposing is impractical.

Laptop chargers require between 100 and 240 volts alternating current input.

(Some may require a more limited range).

USB sockets give 5V direct current, not anywhere near enough to charge a laptop, and the wrong type.

Building a device that could convert 5V DC to the range of AC required would be theoretically posible, but the losses in the system mean it would take much more than the current that is the max a USB can deliver.

You would almost certainly be prevented from connecting the device to the USB in the unlikely event that you made this device, and any attempt to do this might damage the USB outlet.

There are other devices that allow you to extend the life of a laptop batteries.

The most common is the laptop power pack, which essentially charges your laptop from a portable battery.

This would be a much simpler and acceptable solution.

Laptops take too much power

It's perfectly reasonable to think that would work.

The problem is the laptop class of machines just take more power than readily available present-day USB plugs can possibly serve - 5 or 10 watts depending on vintage and quality.

An iPad will use the full 10 watts and then some when at full screen brightness playing a game - and that's just a tablet.

That said, airlines know you want to plug in, and provide options .

Some airlines provide mains receptacles at the seat.

This is the new trend.

Some others may have EmPower 's obsolete 15V system, which is a special, round plug, good for 75 watts (will cover most laptops).

It is electrically similar to an automobile's "cigarette lighter" power port (12-14 volts).

Quite a few products were designed for EmPower's 15V system, including cigarette lighter adapters , Apple MagSafe cables), and inverters with Empower 15V plugs and provide mains voltage.

travel.stackexchange.com/users/55372/Harper - Reinstate Monica

It definitely exists!

(just not how you describe it in your question)

A quick look at my laptop's charger shows that it outputs 19V at 2.1A which is 40 watts of power.

So for a 5V USB socket to give us 40 watts it would have to do so at a current of 8 amps, which is equivalent to 16 default-power 0.5A USB connections simultaneously.

You could possibly buy enough USB cables and connect to all the outlets together, risking looking like some sort of hacker, or buy lots of USB charger banks and USB cables to solder up some bulky adapter which will probably end up looking like a scary bomb (don't actually do that :

D).

Instead, you should really look at the device category specifically designed for this purpose called Laptop power bank .

Here's one example:

You can find them in a variety of supported plug types and capacities .

Make sure yours has a capacity within the allowed limit for your airline.

The total capacity might include all your mobile devices with all batteries, so get out a calculator and use one of the electric parameter conversion sites .

To fit your question exactly, you can probably find a version of this which charges itself from 5V USB ports.

Eventually some USB ports will be able to supply up to 100W for just this purpose (USB 3.0 with SS PD logo) however not the ones on current Ethiopian planes most likely.

Check seatguru.com

with your flight information to see if there is a mains outlet so you can use your regular charger.

In my limited (yet miserable) experience with this airline, probably not in economy on long haul flights.

Probably such an outlet will be available in business or first class, but check.

Some airlines outfit their aircraft with such outlets at every seat on long haul flights.

As mentioned by everyone else, a USB to laptop adapter is useless for most laptops; unless you have one of the newer laptops that allow charging using USB-C (for example, the macbook and macbook pro, dell xps 13, etc.)

If you have one of these laptops - you can charge them using any power that supports USB-C devices ...

unfortunately seatback

USB power doesn't have that fidelity.

Dell sells a powerbank / power adapter for just this kind of situation (here is an Amazon link ): (the silver part is a battery, the black part is a regular wall adapter)

In normal situations, you use this as your regular laptop power supply; and then when traveling you use it as a battery to top-up your laptop.

It is really quite ingenious and one of the many reasons USB-C looks so promising.

Despite being manufactured by Dell, you can use it with most smaller USB-C laptops.

USB-C Laptop

If your laptop has good support for USB-C you should be able to charge it using a USB cable, without using a big laptop charger.

Some laptops doesn't support charging using USB-C, but that's for another question.

Question: I hope this isn't too confusing. I'm travelling on Ethiopian Airlines in a few days and I see that the flight has a USB.  I know that I can charge my electronic devices however the most important thing for me is using my laptop which has a short battery life. I can't charge it with a USB so I was wondering whether I can connect my laptop charger on the plane to a UK socket adapter  that is plugged to the usb port  on the ports at the back of the seats.

Does a USB to UK socket adapter exist?

Unless you have a laptop that supports USB-C, this would not be practical as it uses more power than a USB socket could provide.

The idea is highly unlikely to work out unless you happened to have a laptop with a good USB -C Support like a MacBook oe MacBook Pro

Some believe the device described does not exist, because the device would not be able to maintain its purpose of charging the laptop

There are some laptops that are capable of charging through a USB cable. If your laptop is a MacBook or MacBook pro then it may be chargeable on the airplane


As a citizen of Warsaw, I never carry cash around (and most young people don't), since card payments are accepted almost everywhere (as long as you use Visa or Mastercard), even in small stores, especially in the central parts of Warsaw (which is what you're most likely going to see as a tourist).

I regularly visit restaurants, and not being able to pay by card happened to me like once in the last 5 years, and that was because the terminal was broken.

I know of one bakery chain that still requires cash, but otherwise this was never a problem.

On the other hand, there are situations where it's a huge inconvenience to use cash (for example ticket vending machines present in pretty much every bus accept only card payments, so if you only had cash, you'd have to buy the ticket from the driver).

Minimum amounts are prohibited, though I've seen this a few times (usually 10 PLN in stores, doesn't happen in restaurants)

- this is becoming much rarer than it used to (last time I saw this was two years ago).

According to my bank, if I ever see someone requiring a minimum amount, I should ask for terminal ID (which they are obliged to disclose) and report the situation - so, the risk here is pretty low.

As for museums, they also almost always accept credit card payments, especially the major ones.

If you want to be on the safe side, get 50 to 100 PLN in cash -

you're most likely never going to need it, though.

Update:

As of November 2018, buying tickets in a bus by cash is no longer possible, and the bakery chain which was cash only now accepts cards as well.

From my experience, non fast-food restaurants generally accept credit cards.

As for musea, it depends, so bring always some cash with you, to make sure.

Some smaller shops

require[d]

some minimal sum (not sure if it's legal now), but it was so tiny (about 10 PLN) that you're unlikely to met that sum in a restaurant.

If the credit cards are accepted, those are practically always 2 main systems (Visa and Mastercard).

I've never seen any point that would accept one of them, but not the 2nd.

However, if you use more exotic system (like V-Pay), you should expect it won't be accepted in most places.

Please note that even if credit cards are accepted, it happens that the terminals are broken and in that case you won't be able to pay with your credit card).

I think there's no 100% general answer, but card payments are so popular in Poland that I find it hard to imagine that any bigger museum in Warsaw wouldn't accept it.

The same goes for restaurants.

Regarding any minimum amount, it may happen, but it's more often the case in really small shops, and then this amount is really small (like 10-20 PLN) and you would rather always have bill to pay bigger than this minimum.

About the museum you mentioned, I checked their website and it doesn't state anything about credit cards, which I would interpret as "they don't say it's not accepted, so it is accepted", however they also recommend buying tickets online: http://www.polin.pl/en/planning-your-visit/admission

I stayed in Poland (Warsaw and Poznan) for a month but never had an opportunity to use cash (I withdrew 600 PLN).

All the stores I went to accept my credit card, and it was very difficult to find any place that doesn't accept credit cards

(I only found one, which is a cheap bakery in Poznan and

it put a warning note on the entrance window saying "Cash Only").

As to the minimal sum, I didn't experience it, be it <3 PLN a bottled water in supermarkets, <4 bottled juice in 24H alcohol shop, or <9 a cup of coffee at cafes.

As to the brand, most stores only accept either Visa or MasterCard.

Amex is rarely accepted in cheap restaurants and cafes, except some chained stores (

Wedal, Starbucks, etc).

I also warn you that in Poland, it is more likely than not that you must choose whether you pay in PLN or your currency.

It is usually advisable to pay in PLN as the transaction cost is usually higher in your currency (but depending on your card).

Sometimes clerks choose your currency without asking you, but in that case you can ask them to switch back to PLN before entering your PIN.

At this moment, being a resident of Poland

I find it impossible to find a cash only place at all.

Even the smallest vendors (food trucks etc.) accept cards.

I would recommend to keep 50 PLN for a traveller JUST in case.

But it looks like card payment penetration in Poland is well above 98%.

Question: Are credit cards accepted in the museums and restaurants in Warsaw?  When used in a restaurant, is there a minimum amount you have to spend in order to pay by credit card?  I'm particularly interested in whether the POLIN Museum of the History of Polish Jews accepts payment with a card.

Are credit cards widely accepted in Warsaw?

With the exception of some fast food restaurants, museums and almost every other establishment in Warsaw will accept credit cards beyond a tiny minimum amount (about 10 PLN).

In Poland it seems to be very hard to find a place that accepts cash only. In most/all cases card is accepted and minimum spending amounts seem to be illegal so there should be no problem running into them in stores, restaurants and of course the Polin museum.

Poland seems to be very good with card payments and as it seems to be a difficult place for your to find places that only accept cash. This includes the Polin museum.

Some shops may have a minimum purchase amount requirement that is present for card payment, however it seems to be illegal to do so now.


In terms of booking flights, the only thing you need to consider is what your passport says.

It will have fields that are also marked in English, such as "Surname" and "Given names".

When you book flight tickets, input exactly what is in those fields, in the corresponding field to what your passport refers to as your "Surname", "Given names", etc.

If that happens to be wrong according to your actual name, local naming conventions, etc, then that is perhaps something the issuing authority of your passport could consider dealing with.

However, in terms of booking tickets, the only thing you personally can do is input everything exactly as it appears in your passport, in the corresponding fields.

That is what airlines, governments, etc. will want to see, and the absence of it will typically cause problems.

travel.stackexchange.com/users/41775/Revetahw says Reinstate Monica

What matters is what is on your ID, but in general: "surname" =

"last name" =

姓

The phrase "last name" in English refers to your family name, regardless of whether your family name is customarily said/written first or last.

I suppose you're Singaporean?

That's a current practice in Singapore.

However you don't have much of a choice.

Your family name is Wong, and your first names, plural, are Minnie AND Qin Qing.

I agree with other answers here that if this is for an airline ticket booking you should transfer what's stated in your passport to the airline ticket – that is, if this is for international travel.

First name and last name are an entirely western language concept.

More generic (and culturally more sensitive) would be to use given name and family name .

Since names in China and other cultures put the family name before the given name, first and last name don't make sense here anymore, though I find that many people in cultures with reversed "first name" "

last name" are aware of that.

In addition to your purely Chinese name (Wong Qin Qing, seemingly a Catonese/Mandarin mix) in family name – given name order, you also have a western style name (Minnie Wong, whereby "Minnie" is probably the given name you chose) in given name – family name order.

When you mix both it could lead to confusion beyond identifying you.

So it would be best to be "Minnie Wong" to your western friends/colleagues or in Hong Kong, where that's more common, and be "Wong Qin Qing" or "Wang Qin Qing" in your (mainland) Chinese circle.

I am sure you are Chinese but not China residence, maybe Malaysian Chinese or Singaporean Chinese, am I right?I face this same issue before.

Your passport printed Minnie Wong Qin Qing, am i right?Minnie

is your Christian / English name.

Wong is your family name

Qin Qing is your name.

While you make the flight booking, make in this way:

First name:

Qin QingLast name:

Winnie Wong Only in this way, while print out your boarding pass, it will show Winnie Wong / Qin Qing, you wouldn't face any problem boarding.

This issue actually is suffering many people before, the airline also advice change the first name, last name as formal format Given name, Surname.

Remember, while flight boarding, they only recognize what word type in your passport, if your passport only write as Winnie Wong Qin Qing, don't book your flight with Winnie 黄青青！But

some country passport comes with Chinese Mandarin word and English word, they are safe with both, example Taiwan ROC.

Happy Safe Flight.

Question: My name is Minnie Wong Qin Qing. If I put Wong as my surname, and the others as my last name, finally the full name will be:  Minnie Qin Qing Wong.  So what can I do?

I am Chinese. Which name is my surname and which is my last name, for a flight booking?

Your family name/surname is Wong, and your first names/given names, plural, are Minnie AND Qin Qing. When booking tickets, you should enter the information as it appears in your passport.

It is advised that you enter your details according to how it appears on your ID/Passport. Enter your family name and your first name as you see it on your passport.


Easiest way is to read the signs.

In small airport there is only a small set of check in counters, just read the sign behind each to determine which airline is checking in there.

In larger airports there is either a electronic signboard telling you what row or area each airline is located or signs outside the various entrance doors to indicate which airline inside.

The departure gates are in a secure area and you can't go there until after you have checked in.

About the only time you would check in at the departure gate would be if you are flying in from another airport on another ticket.

The first thing to do is go to the departure screens, which list not the departure gates, but the check-in rows, or aisles, for all airlines.

You go there, look for the airline (sometimes the same aisle can serve two airlines), and wait in line.

The departure gate is where you will board the plane.

You'll see screens with the flight numbers and gates, after security and immigration checks.

Check-in is before the serious security check (you won't get through security without a boarding pass).

There will be signs showing you where to check-in for a particular airline.

Departure gate is after security.

It's where you go to actually get on the plane.

There will be more signs showing you were the various gates are.

Notes

If you don't have hold luggage, you often don't go anywhere tocheck-in.

You do that online, before you get to the airport andeither print off the boarding pass, or get a code on the airline'sapp on your phone.

If you haven't checked in online, at leastRyanair will let you check in at the airport - but they will chargeyou extra for it (so remember to do it online).

Some airports have a lightweight security check for everyone on entry to thebuilding.

This is the not the main security check before entry to the secured "airside".

Do not be confused by it.

travel.stackexchange.com/users/52986/Martin Bonner supports Monica

Your ticket, boarding pass or confirmation mail will tell you which terminal to go to (if there's more than one).

Once you're there, you read the signs and information screens.

once you are in the terminal you can: approach a information point, they will provide you the info about which counter is the airline and which gate you have to proceed. or by huge cities or capitals you can see the issue that the airport has more than one Terminal, in such cases the Airline is always giving you that info as soon as you do the check in... they will have a huge departure time table...

there you can spot your flight

travel.stackexchange.com/users/47711/ΦXocę 웃 Пepeúpa ツ

In Germany, large airports whose terminals are somewhat distant (FRA, MUC) even show on the roadsigns near the airport which airline is located at which terminal.

Good luck reading those at 80 km/h, though :)

Question: Out of interest, how do you know where you are to go once at the airport to check in and what is it called?   Is it departure gate on the board you go to with the flight number and airline which tells you what gate? And is that where you would check in and get the boarding pass from to go through security etc?

How do you know where to go to check in at airport/airline?

Your ticket, boarding pass or confirmation mail will tell you which terminal to go to (if there's more than one). Once there, you can check the departure screens or ask at the information desk for the correct check-in row or aisle for your airline. Once you have checked in, there will be other signs showing you where the gates are.

Navigation to your check in station and departure gate are both done with the help of screen found inside the airport. You will also receive a confirmation mail that will tell you, which terminal to go to at the airport before you arrive. The check-in station is where you deposite your bag and the departure gate is where you get on your plane. If you encounter any problems you can make an enquiry at an information point at the airport.

In most cases airports have signs or screens that provide the location of your airline check-in station and once you go passed security there will be more screens telling you which gate you departe from

You should receive a confirmation mail that will tell you where to go at the air port

There are information points at the air port that you can ask about your flight and any other quiries you may have.


I've tried it again with the same photo on the next day and it worked.

Perhaps their online system is overloaded at certain times and one should simply try again in a few hours.

I found a work around that will allow you to complete the DS-160 if it is crashing at the photo upload screen.

You just have to upload a photo that WILL NOT pass the photo verification.

When your photo is rejected you now have the option to continue without submitting a photo, it then tells you can bring a photo to the interview with you as in the image below.

This will allow you to at least submit the application and book an interview.

To have my photo not pass the verification I scaled it down in size to 50% so that it was low res.

Other methods may work, keep trying until you get a failure.

The website is very buggy and this is the best solution I can find to get past being stuck at the photo page.

Just had this issue.

The fix that worked for me was to wait a few minutes after uploading it on the screen where it says "the photo passes the requirements*.

Then press the "Next" button.

I guess that there's a bunch of services talking to each other behind the scenes, and if you press Next too quickly, the photo hasn't had time to propagate fully yet.

I wrote to the embassy and they suggested I should try starting a new application from scratch.

This time it worked!!!

The only difference is that now I filled everything from start to end.

Before I saved and upload/retrieve a couple of times.

PS: The last time I used Google Chrome in Incognito mode, but

I bet that had nothing to do with it...

I've had similar experience with that tool.

I think the solution was to resize the photo to make the face much more prominent.

This picture is often given as example

but I think the picture that worked for me looked closer to this one .

Also, the picture needs to be 600x600 px and under 240k and it can't be blurred.

The photo check tool is not reliable in my experience.

I did what Mark Clayton suggested - uploaded a bad quality (low resolution) photo.

I took it to the embassy with a physical US passport sized photo and it was fine.

There were so many people in the queue without photos uploaded on the forms - it clearly happens to a lot of people!

I have also had this issue.

Tried many times in many ways but not successful.

Finally, I used my friend in a different country to upload my picture from his place, and it worked.

I guess the internet security protocol has some security issue when we are uploading from developed countries or countries which are not up to date with the current internet security protocol.

Question: I'm trying to apply for a B1/B2 US visa through the  official website  but unfortunately can't get past the "Confirm photo" stage as I see the following error:   I've tried to re-upload the photo several times in both Chrome, Android Chrome and IE 11 to no avail. Is there something I can do so that I can complete my application?

How to fix the "an error occurred while processing your photo" message when applying for a US visa?

Make sure that the image size and resolution are correct, and that your face is correctly positioned. The system may be overloaded or something may have gone wrong, so you could wait for a few minutes after uploading, try again in a few hours or even get a friend to complete the process from another country. Finally, you have the option not to submit a photo, and instead bring a physical photo to the interview.

There are a numbr of solutions to this problem including re-starting the form from scratch, taking in a hard copy of your photo to the embassy, attempting to re-size the photo to fit the upload criteria and getting someone to do it for you abriad.

One solution can be to start the application form again from the beginning at a later time/date

You can take a hard copy of your photo down to the embassy yourself. In most cases this is the default option when your photo upload fails.

Sometimes this issue is with the photo no being in the correct format/size so you must re-size it till it fits the criteria

Having someone else do the form for you in a different country can get the form to submit.


It's very simple.

A Passport number (or other valid travel doc) is required to travel, not to buy a ticket.

It's not uncommon for first time travelers to buy tickets while their Passport application is still being processed.

Note, if you do not or cannot provide a valid Passport, you will be denied boarding with no compensation.

You can modify the Passport number any time, probably without cost, either at the airline's website or by calling reservations.

Likely you will get an e-mail or (if asked to be contacted in an other way)

a text message or a letter, to add your passport information to the booking.

For many travels, you do not need to add the information before you check in.

If that is so for your travel, you will be asked to add it as part of your checking-in.

There are travels, even international ones, where you do not need to give a passport number.

If so, you do not need to add your passport number at all.

If you do not want to wait, you can usually go to the website of the airline, to your travel agent if they booked for you or call the airline company on their help line.

Once you logged into your account or called up your flight with the information given to you, you can find the information where and how to add your passport number.

Where I have written 'passport' it can also be an other accepted travel document if that is acceptable for your flight.

It is possible that your airline does not allow passengers to alter or add passport numbers after booking the flight, in that case you may have to contact the airline to have an agent to add it for you.

(Although this is less likely with airlines that do not ask for the document details at the time of booking.)

In some cases, the information can be added as late as when you are in the airport to check in just before the flight, but better ask earlier, as some international travel can only be done if the information is at the airline at least 24 hours (or sometimes more) before travel.

This is absolutely normal.

A passport is not required to purchase a ticket and you may be doing it for someone else or someone else could be doing it for you, so only need the full name of passenger is needed.

This makes the process of buying quicker.

Any time after the booking goes through, passengers (which may not be the purchaser) can complete their information, up to right at the moment of booking, although some jurisdictions require that info is send a certain amount of time ahead of travel.

A passport is required for international travel but not always for domestic travel.

I am not sure there are even exceptions to the international travel

requires a passport common knowledge (they may be some close countries that allow travel between them without a passport, a good other question!).

Not asking for passport info at booking time, even when required for travel, can reduce issues since someone may renew or lose a passport in between booking and travel.

In both cases, most countries now change passport numbers.

At least the expiry date will change.

It very much depends from where to where you travel.

If I fly from Europe to the USA, I have to supply my passport number when booking my ticket.

OTOH, if I book a ticket to another Schengen country, even with the same airline company, I don't have to supply a passport number.

I won't go through immigration when travelling between Schengen countries, and airline companies are not asked for passport numbers.

Hence, they don't ask (and I would not be surprised if they are not even allowed to ask for the passport number for such flights).

If you are not crossing international boundaries, then passport information is not required.

It also may not be required if you do not need a passport for the itinerary (for example, flying within the Schengen zone, GCC citizens flying within the GCC, etc.)

In my experience KLM, Emirates, Qatar and Etihad all allow customers to update their passport information online.

They even notify you when your passport has expired to update that information.

However, doing so is only required if you plan on checking in online.

Otherwise, if required, your passport information is collected at the check-in desk or the self-service check-in kiosks.

Question: Is it OK when they are not asking my passport number for the travel? I ask because I bought my ticket and a few days later I realized they did not ask.    How do I change my details to enter my document for the travel?

Why are they not asking me about my passport number for my booking?

You need a passport to travel across international boundaries, but not necessarily to buy a ticket. Flights within a country or within the Schengen Zone or GCC may not require a passport either.

There are cases where the passsport number is not required at all, however in the evnt that is it the details can be provided or edited on the airlines website or through a link that will be sent via email or text. Details can even be provided in at the check-in itself, but in the event that none of these options are availabkle to you then it is possible to call an agent to get the problem sorted for yourself.

There are a few situations where you would not need to provide your passport number at all. This can be applied to your intial purchase of the ticket, but is also dependant on where you are flying to and from.

There are a number of ways your passport details can be modified/provided. This can be done online via the airlines website, which can be provided through email or text or can be done directly at the airport check-in.

It is possible that the airline does not allow passengers to alter their details once entered so you would have to call and agent to get it done for you.


The site HeyWhatsThat.com is a pretty neat tool for answering this sort of question.

I've taken the liberty of creating a map showing the view from Lands End, which should be available to everyone at that link.

Here's the computer-generated panorama:

The Isles of Scilly are barely visible above the horizon (the horizontal magenta line) to the west-southwest, in the direction of the brown line.

The site also calculates the entire "viewshed" from Lands End and displays it on a map:

As can be seen from the pink shading on the Isles, their peaks can be seen from Lands End.

However, it is not possible to see from the cliffs at Lands End to the beaches of the Isles.

They can be seen from Cornwall, and photographic evidence isn't hard to find.

Isles of Scilly from Gwennap Head .

Source : Bob Jones via Wikimedia Commons.

I saw the islands from near St Just last week, a distance of almost 30 miles.

Very faint, but definitely visible.

I had no trouble with binoculars separating the islands and the hill on Samson.

I saw them using binoculars aboard the Brittany Ferry service from Plymouth, Devon to Roscoff, Brittany on 25th August 2018.

Halangy Down Transmitter on St Marys was visible.

The visibility was excellent, but perhaps there was a temperature inversion happening, or something like it, since I wouldn't have expected to be able to see over such a great distance (approx 90 - 95 miles).

I have seen the Lizard peninsula from Rame Head before with the naked eye, which is about 45 - 50 miles, and that was unusual, so I was really excited to see the Isles of Scilly.

Based on Mark Mayos excellent answer to this question and calculating the height 80 metres close to the Cornwall coast line you can only see a maximum of 32km with the naked eye.

This is based on the calculation: where d = distance in km and h = height in metres.

Question: On a clear day is it possible to see the Isles of Scilly from Cornwall with the aid of binoculars? A distance of around 40km.   I know on a very clear day you can only see maximum 20km from sea level but the coast of Cornwall is higher than sea level. So does the height advantage of the cliffs enable you to see further across the horizon?  There are a couple of online forums that suggest you can see the Isle of Scilly from Cornwall but no photographic evidence.

Can you see the Isles of Scilly from Cornwall?

They can be seen faintly from Cornwall, but the beaches of the islands are not visible from the cliffs at Land's End.

It is possible to see the Isles of Scilly from Cornwall, however it cannot be seen from the cliffs at Lands End. There is picture evidence to support that the Isles of Scilly can be seen from Cornwall though.

The isles of Scilly are barely visible above the horizon, but they are visible. There is even photographic evidence to rpove it.

it is not possible to see from the cliffs at Lands End to the beaches of the Isles.


It's a sign of respect.

A bit like using both hands to shake yours.

(Source: I lived in Africa for something like 7 years.)

I personally found this more common in West Africa than East Africa.

Edit: Perhaps as clarification, the right elbow typically is held with the left hand, as if to support the right arm.

But, I've also often seen 'just' touching the right forearm with the fingers of the left hand.

As MastaBaba said , it's a sign of respect.

As an Ethiopian, most of us were taught as children to hold our hand (anywhere on the forearm)

when greeting elders (basically anyone older).

It is considered rude to shake hands without holding one's arm, and in most cases the person (elder) will be offended.

Sometimes, the person may also look down during the handshake, which is also another sign of respect.

Having lived in Uganda Africa for almost 8 years I think I can answer your question.

Here in Uganda its a sign of respect.

I often place my hand on my elbow when shaking the hands of the elderly because I acknowledge their old age and their knowledge.

It means they acknowledge you and respect you.

Like @Kidus answered its considered rude to not place your other hand on some part of your forearm.

Sometimes the person will nod his/her head toward the ground while shaking your hand, Its also a sign of respect and it would be disrespectful not to follow suit.

I think it is the respectful way of shaking hands.

I assume this from reading The No 1 Ladies Detective Agency books (set in Botswana) where the main character refers to this as the proper way of shaking hands.

A foreigner who shows respect by shaking hands this way goes up in the character’s estimation.

Just as another place where it is done, this is the standard way of shaking hands in the sport of Taekwondo.

See this page for example: Shaking Hands A Taekwon-Do handshake is always given with two hands.

With the right hand extended, place the left hand palm down under the right elbow.

This is a gesture of respect and should be used at all times, even outside the dojang, when giving or receiving items, as well as when shaking hands.

My experience is with Nepal, transaction like paying or gifting are conducted with the right hand.

Placing the left hand on the right elbow connotes greater respect or formality to the transaction.

Adding the hand to elbow is like changing "Its nice to meet you" to "Its very nice to meet you" or "Thank you" to "Thank you, sir".

Question: I have recently had contact with an acquaintance from Eastern Africa (I think from Ethiopia or Somalia). When the person greeted me, she shook my hand while holding her elbow of the right arm with the left hand (see image). After this happened a few times, I figured it was not just a coincidence.  Does this gesture have any meaning?

Handshake while holding own right elbow

Supporting the right arm with the left hand is a sign of respect, especially toward elders.

This handshake is considered to be a very respectful gesture in certains african countries. It is how the children of certain African countries are taught to great their elders and friends respectfully.


The child would not need a passport, but you must be able to prove that you are their legal guardian.

Assuming that you are flying, the best thing to do would be consult your airline's webpage, as sometimes policies can vary between airlines.

For example, from Flybe : Republic of Ireland travel British and Irish citizens must have a form of photographic ID which proves their nationality/citizenship for immigration purposes e.g. a valid passport or full/provisional photographic driving licence.

British and Irish citizens under the age of 18 do not need a passport when travelling with a parent or guardian but

it is highly recommended that they have one.

Without a passport, the parent/guardian must be able to prove the relationship with the child, showing birth certificate, marriage certificate etc.

A child of any other nationality must hold a passport which is covered for the period of intended stay.

The fact is that all British and Irish citizens have an unconditional right to enter each other's countries.

Meaning anyone with documents proving or making it plausible that they're British/Irish must be let in.

As such, if the child is yours, their birth certificate stating your relationship is enough, although some check-in handling agents (if flying) may not accept it (contact them beforehand and ask)

If it's not your child, ask the parents to obtain the child's birth certificate as well as a legalised/notarised affidavit of consent containing a copy of their ID as well as their contact details.

Be careful though.

Ryanair won't accept anything other than a passport between Ireland and the UK.

As far as I am aware, they are the only carrier with this requirement.

I am not clear how this affects accompanied minors flying on this route with Ryanair, though.

Note also, based on experience travelling using only a driver's license, that you may be asked to produce your boarding card as evidence of your journey, this has happened to me several times recently, when entering Ireland, so be sure to keep this handy.

RYANAIR ONLY ACCEPT PASSPORTS.

I've just done a live chat to see if I can take my 10 month old baby from the UK to dublin with a birth certificate and they have said they will only accept passports.

From my own experience as both a bus passenger and travelling via private car as a passenger, the experience differs .

My ID was always checked before boarding at Pembroke Dock as a bus passenger and randomly as a car passenger at Rosslare.

It seems to depend on the mood of the staff and how busy they are.

I have not got a passport yet , but no doubt will need to get one sooner or later.

Have never been asked for ID for our child of whom we have Special Guardianship.

Where in the UK are you?

If you travel by boat, you won't have your ID checked, so another option is to drive, or Rail and Sail.

Question: I understand from various answers here, and from .gov.uk that I don't need a passport to travel to Ireland: I can just show my UK driver's license.  But what if I'm travelling with a 10 year old child who does not have a passport, and obviously no driving license either.  Is there some other form of ID which would be accepted?

UK citizens traveling to Ireland with a child having no passport, what's the alternative for the ID?

British and Irish citizens under the age of 18 do not need a passport when travelling with a parent or guardian, but proof of legal guardianship such as a birth certificate should be provided. If you are not the parent, you should also bring a legalised/notarised affidavit of consent from the parents containing a copy of their ID as well as their contact details. Children of any other nationality are required to hold a passport that is valid for the duration of their stay.

In most cases the minor does not require a form of ID unless they are a none british citizen or flying with Ryanair. It is the parent/guardian who requires a valid form of ID and proof that the child is there's or that they are the legal guardian. This may come in the form of a birth certificate and/or a legalised/notarised affidavit of consent which would also contain a copy of the real parents ID if the child is not yours.

Provided that the child is a british citizen then they do not require a passport or driving license in most cases. It is the parent/guardian who re-quires a valid form of ID as well as some form of proof that the child is either theirs or they are the legal guardian. If the child is not a british citizen then they require a passport.

S1: Ryanair won't accept anything other than a passport between Ireland and the UK even if the passenger is a minor.

If traveling by land or sea you do not have to provide any form of ID.


Even if you were over 18, you should be able to attend together since you're family and you're traveling together.

This is particularly true if your baggage is at all intermingled, i.e. if you have things belonging to each of you in the same bag.

I'd present together.

You'll certainly be advised if this isn't acceptable, and I fully expect it will be acceptable.

Your age doesn't matter.

Go together.

I usually do so.

This simplifies the control of the immigration officer, especially if your mother doesn't speak English or if she expect that you will guide her to the city and country.

In any case, to reassure you, you will do some queuing, so check how other people behave.

If a new policy is being followed, you will find that other people will be split (from their group).

Short Answer: If you're traveling together, you will go together, regardless of your age.

I've repeatedly flown into the US from overseas, most recently last month.

My family is mixed US passport and Green Card, and we don't have the same last name.

Regardless, we've always been processed with the automated machines.

If there's someone with a US passport in the group, and everyone else has the required visa, then you all go straight through the automated system.

You can choose your preferred language for the process at the kiosk.

A non-US citizen will have to submit to a finger print scan at the machine, everyone must answer questions about their trip, and everyone will be photographed.

At the end, each person has a printed "receipt" to carry, and eventually give to a customs agent.

You interact with a human afterwards, but almost everything is done by machine.

There's a long queue beforehand, so use the restroom or fill your water bottle immediately after you leave the plane.

We've stood in line up to 40 minutes.

Newark is listed as having the Automated Passport Control machines.

If you are eligible to use these then...

The kiosks allow people residing at the same address to be processed together.

I believe for visitors that means those who will be residing at the same address (including the same hotel)

while in the US, not a matter of living together in your country of residence.

Certainly you and your mother should move to a machine together and start entering your details - it will guide you if you need to do anything different

I know the question was about US, but I guess it also depends on the officer's mood.

I was travelling to Finland last December on our way to Finland

the officer asked us to go border control station together, while on our way back another officer specifically told me to keep the distance between me and the control station while he was looking at my gf's documents.

As others pointed out, age shouldn't matter.

If I travel to the USA with my spouse, usually we approach the officer together -- it has never been a problem.

Except the last time.

We then flew into JFK, and at that moment, I was a "returning ESTA visitor", and my spouse was not.

Which meant, we got sorted into two different lanes.

But if that doesn't happen to you, and you're both queuing in the same lane, just approach the officer together.

The worst what will happen is the officer saying one of you have to wait till the other is done.

Question: My mom and I are traveling to New York City together soon and I will be 17 years old by the time of travel. The airport of arrival is Newark Liberty Airport(EWR).  Will we have to go one after the other to the border control officer or can we be together since I am still under 18?

My mom and I are traveling to NYC together. Can we be together at the border control station or will we have to go one after another?

Unles specifically instructed otherwise, you can go to the machine or desk together if you are residing at the same address.

In most cases you can enter through the machines and approach the customs guard together though there are some rare exceptions to this i.e. when you are required to stand in a different line from your mother, when an officer tells you to separate or when a customes officer tells you to wait while he checks your partners details.

Regardless of your age you should be able to use the machines and approach the customes officer together. There are some instances where you may be placed in separate ques.

In some cases you will have to deal with the officers demands and separate if they decide to separate you


I did a search of all intra-European flights for tomorrow (12 Feb 2018) and came up with the following:

Hahn Air has a flight with a Cessna Citation (6 seats) scheduled between LUX and DUS Loganair

has several flights, as previously noted, mostly from KOI, NRL, and PPW on Britain-Norman Islanders (8 seats), as well as a number of flights around Scotland on 19-seat Twin Otters Direct Flight has some Islanders with 9 seats flying out of LWK Hebridean Air Services flies some Islanders from COL, TRE, and OBN Isle of Scilly Skybus flies 16-seat Twin Otters from ISC to NQY and LEQ BA's Scandinavian subsidiary, Sun Air of Scandinavia, flies 18-seat Avro J-31's between BGO and BLL Aurigny

flies

18-seat Dornier 228s between GCI and DNR Flybe flies 19-seat Avro J-41's between CWL and VLY Chalair flies Beechcraft Beech 1900D's with 19 seats around western France, mostly based out of BOD and NTE Norlandair flies 19-seat Twin Otters in Iceland AIS Airlines flies 19-seat Avro J-32's around Sweden, including ORB, GOT, and MMX Aero VIP

flies Avro J-32's around the Madeira Islands Twin Jet

flies Beechcraft Beech 1900D's with 19 seats around France based out of ORY, MRS, TLS, and LYS SUE Orenberg

flies

20-seat Let 410's around Russia.

That's just for one day.

It's certainly likely that a lot of small routes with small planes don't fly everyday

so I'm probably missing some.

OFD in Germany is offering regular flights (scheduled) between Emden and Borkum using a Cessna 172, with 2 pax max.

Flight schedule

The fleet

Wikipedia lists a few dozen European operators of Britten-Norman Islanders .

Many of them are historical, but a few appear to currently fly scheduled routes with them: Loganair for Westray to Papa Westray Isles of Scilly Skybus Hebridean Air Services FLN Frisia Luftverkehr

travel.stackexchange.com/users/16947/hmakholm left over Monica

Norwegian company Lufttransport have a scheduled route between Bodø Airport and Værøy Heliport using the AgustaWestland AW139 helicopter ( Værøy Airport has been closed since a Twin Otter fatally crashed).

This helicopter has 15 seats.

It's a bit heavier and longer than some small fixed-wing aircrafts, but certainly much narrower.

Dimensions from Wikipedia:

Length: 16.66 m (54 ft 8 in) Width: 2.26 m (10 ft 0 in) Height: 4.98 m (16 ft 4 in) Empty weight: 3,622 kg (7,985 lb)

For comparison, the Twin Otter DHC-6 Series 100 has:

Length:

15.77 m

Width: 19.8 m (wingspan) Height:

5.9 m Empty weight: 2,653 kg The Britten-Norman BN-2A Islander is shorter, lower, and lighter yet, but as a fixed-wing aircraft, remains much wider than the AgustaWestland.

For most definitions of "smaller", the Britten-Norman would win, but if you're looking for the most compact "plane", the AgustaWestland helicopter flying to Værøy wins.

In Portugal there is a company, Sevenair that only operates a small airplane, a 19 seats Dornier 228 .

It flies across all Portugal, North to South, connecting 5 cities, Bragança, Vila Real, Viseu, Cascais, Portimão.

According to their website , Finist'air has flights most days of the week between Brest and Ushant on a 9-seat Cessna Caravan .

Question: I’ve enjoyed flying in smaller planes on scheduled flights in the past (e.g. Aurigny’s old Trislanders). Are there any other scheduled flights in Europe in small (sub-20-seat) planes that are still running? I know about the Westray to Papa Westray flight already but feel free to include it in a list.

What are the smallest planes running scheduled flights in Europe?

There are a number of flights in different countries with fewer than 20 seats, especially to remote areas and islands. These include a 6-seat Hahn Air flight between LUX and DUS; several 8- and 9-seat flights in Scotland using Britten-Norman Islanders, scheduled flights between Emden and Borkum in Germany using a Cessna 172, with max. 2 passengers, or Finist'air flights most days of the week between Brest and Ushant on a  9-seat Cessna Caravan.

There are a large number of flights around Europe that are made in air planes of 20 seats or less with the smallest number of seats being 6. These flights take place in a range of countries including England, Germany, West of France, Scotland to name a few.