Security...what a joke! [Archive]

Jockflyer

6th Jun 2006, 10:32

Pointless security checks at EGAE (City of Derry).
A couple of days ago, after a flight from Derry to Dublin, aftert the pax disembarked, the cabin crew brought me an empty Guiness pint glass and can, which a passenger had obviously left behind, having boarded with it at LDY.
HOw on earth did they get through security with that I thought!
So, on returning to LDY, I took said pint glass to the security people and asked how the passenger got through with the potentially legal object. The security guy said they knew about the problem, but the bosses won't do anything about it. He told me they are instructed to confiscate nail files and such like, but once through security, the pax go to the departure lounge, where they are served food with metal knives and forks, and where the must have gotten the pint glass from. They are then free from any more security checks and board the aircraft fully armed!!!!
I can't beleive security staff know about this, but won't (or are unable) to do anything to improve it.
Comments please.
JF

bbrown1664

6th Jun 2006, 11:25

Most airports sell you the beer and give you the glass afer security, but you still have to eat your steak with a plastic knife.

Don't blame security, blame the gate staff instead for not strip searching everyone including you!

Cytherea

6th Jun 2006, 12:20

This is only one of a huge number of contradictions in supposed airport/airline security...How about the glass bottles available for purchase in most airport "duty-free" shops or even on board some aircraft...we happily let people wander around with those.

On a related note but slightly more logical...I note the authorities in AMS have removed the security check from immediately after immigration and now put the machines and search cone at entry to the departure gate - Far more sensible and appropriate if more labour intensive for the airport authority.

apaddyinuk

6th Jun 2006, 13:51

Im confused, the bars airside in Dublin airport serve your guinness in a pint glass and they sell them as gifts in the duty free.

ph-ndr

6th Jun 2006, 14:16

As a SLF I'll keep it wift and to the point here. Part of what I do is to work in IT security (where security is just as much an euphemism as in the airport kind of security). Where many people err is in recognising security properly.

Airport security is actually proper security, the way it is intended to function. Like with all other operations, follow the money and you will find the answer. The airports and airlines can not exist without the crucial ingredient: the passanger that pays for the show and thus generate the business.

So how is today's airport security good security? It convinces the layman that flying is indeed safe. Given all the hoopla and strange security measures, this has to be a generally safe thing, not? This keeps the audience coming, and the number of accidents stemming from things security should have caught onto at a fairly low and acceptable rate.

Like all security measures you see at the airport and onboard, all these are simple reactionary measures put in place to give half a nod to the fact that we don't want last weeks nuthead from the headlines to repeat him/herself just now. (The shoe carnival after whatshisname from the UK wanted to blow himself up with items embedded in shoe, no knives after 9/11 since that was the method at that time, etc., positive confirmation of luggage and owner after PanAm and a few others).

You will rarely find authorities putting down security measures that will interfere with the revenue model of operations (hence glassbottles in tax free, and perfume that in cases should would be strong enough work as pepper spray if applied correct, etc.).

So what does this have to do with making ecurity actually being security? It protects the business, the revenue, and gives the business the appearance of being impregnable to nutters and others wanting to disrupt it, this making granny and the family feel warm and fuzzy about how securely they are taken from A to B, given how much of what they hear at the airport is this or that due to security reasons, new security regulations, etc.

What does this have to do with security from the standpoint fo wanting to make sure harmfull items cannot be carried onboard and actually securing the revenue model from real threat? Very little. If that was the case shops would be pre-checkin to facilitate taxfree going in checked luggage, returants with glass/cutlery would be pre-security to make sure noone could get less friendly objects onboard.

So next time time someone promises great security or berates security, ask yourself this: security for who, protecting what?

-A

canadair

6th Jun 2006, 14:38

ph-ndr

6th Jun 2006, 14:51

The current state of "security and screening" is probably the result of high level meetings held on the subject:
So, we need to be seen to be doing something, what is really obvious every time it goes through the machine?
uuhh, little tiny scissors? yup, knives?, oh ya, nail file? yes! Guns? well on the rare occasion some idiot has one, certainly.
OK, and of those items what does almost everyone have?
well not too many people have guns and knives on a daily basis, but you know we see little tiny scissors and nail files in pretty much every bag!
Well, then we have our solution, an item we can confiscate from almost every passenger, now we look like we are REALLY achieving something!!
Right then, little tiny scissors and nail files it is!

( has anyone seen a valid survey on how many homicides are the direct result of a nail file on a yearly basis?)

Well luckily due to the extreme diligence of the current security staff this can no longer happen, but in previous ( pre 9-11) years had the purser called up to inform us that the aircraft had been comandeered by a nail file wielding gang of thugs, I would have been laughing too hard to make a valid decision!
However the solution would have been easy, as most FA's used to have as an MEL item at least one massive! nail file, said group would have been out gunned anyway.:ok:

In fact this may all have deeper conspiratorial roots, it may actually be a massive behind the scenes lobby by the press on nail people,
Take away the means to perform much needed nail maintenance, and the sales will soar!

I think you'll find nail files stemming from the same worries that were post 9/11, looking at the way the attacks were carried out and the "weapon" used. This way pretty much any object loosely fitting this description. This is as with other turning points in aviation security a completely reactionary method, and as numbers can tell, it seems tohave worked. People are aware that any number of strangely normal objects have been used in commandeering an aircraft, thus a long list of things have been prohibited, and this makes granny feel safe about flying.

This is a system designed with the security angle of making the layman feel secure, not a system deisgned to make an aircraft a location where it is impossible to combine bad intent with dangerous objects. That kind of security is what you find in banks, where the items to be secured is money in its immediate form and it is mostly physically impossible to gain access to significant parts of it and get away without going to extreme lengths. A big difference between the bank's pile of money and the 9/11 attacks is the aspect of reuse, which makes the proposition of taking that security model across to the airline/aircraft/airport world.

-A

MrHorgy

6th Jun 2006, 15:52

Let's not even talk about the equipment that is onboard aircraft, and which in some cases aren't that well concealed - who'd ever think of using those for attacking someone? :rolleyes:

Horgy

ph-ndr

6th Jun 2006, 16:05

Let's not even talk about the fire axe's that are onboard aircraft, and which in some cases aren't that well concealed - who'd ever think of using those for attacking someone? :rolleyes:

Horgy

There is probabably little good to come out of discussing open paths that do exists openly, neither in terms of how it is received by those who view it (authorities, emkplyees or laymen), as well as trying to pull up a list of these, as there are many things that are still open paths into the aircraft.

-A

MrHorgy

6th Jun 2006, 16:07

My post edited now.

My point was there is so many dangers out there worse than a nail file, I resent it when security take the scissors off me I use to open the Atlas Boxes!

Horgy

routechecker

6th Jun 2006, 19:11

http://swamp.com.au/assets/strips/S966C.GIF

LatviaCalling

6th Jun 2006, 20:03

The security people are a bit more relaxed now. Small scissors and nail cutters have come off the list.

As for other items, a heavy duty serated plastic knife served on board, or a fork, can do serious damage if used in the proper way, which I won't go into.

On speed on profile

6th Jun 2006, 20:15

As for other items, a heavy duty serated plastic knife served on board, or a fork, can do serious damage if used in the proper way, which I won't go into. Surely any plastic airline cutlery that can cut through airline food should be banned. I dont even think the crash axe would cut through some airline food that I have tried to eat!

Hasnt this thread been done before?? :zzz:

ph-ndr

6th Jun 2006, 20:44

Surely any plastic airline cutlery that can cut through airline food should be banned. I dont even think the crash axe would cut through some airline food that I have tried to eat!
Hasnt this thread been done before?? :zzz:

There's been plenty of threads with frustrating people here bearting some aspect of it as being illogical or hevy handed. People here seem to be stuck in the rut about thinking tht the security is the kind of security that has the ulterior aim of precluding any kind of dangerous object to be combined with any kind of bad person onboard an aircraft, which is far from the truth.

If people could get their mind around that simple fact and try to have a discussion about what kind of security they would like to have and then maybe this couid be fruitful (and even educational), but bashing the same topic about having had some item of little consequence removed or having had a pointless patting down at some point on the tarmac when you are the personel tasked with actually commanding the aircraft is always going to end in a thread with a few posts moaning about that, a few followups mentioning a few other pointless runins with security and then that will be it.

-A

Charles Darwin

6th Jun 2006, 23:57

I see only one way out of this.
Strip all passengers and handcuff them to the seats!:}

xetroV

7th Jun 2006, 00:29

I think you'll find nail files stemming from the same worries that were post 9/11, looking at the way the attacks were carried out and the "weapon" used. This way pretty much any object loosely fitting this description. This is as with other turning points in aviation security a completely reactionary method, and as numbers can tell, it seems tohave worked. People are aware that any number of strangely normal objects have been used in commandeering an aircraft, thus a long list of things have been prohibited, and this makes granny feel safe about flying.
But granny doesn't know that the "weapons" that were supposedly used to take over control of those planes were (not surprisingly) never banned after 9/11. "Priceless!" :\;)

ph-ndr

7th Jun 2006, 02:43

But granny doesn't know that the "weapons" that were supposedly used to take over control of those planes were (not surprisingly) never banned after 9/11. "Priceless!" :\;)

Yes, but as I've pointed out, that is not that important for the industry from an economic viewpoint, and the security is there to protect the economic revenue, i.e. making sure that granny feels safe. As long as granny and returns there may as well be mandatory rectal probes to look for hidden items, the aim of the airport/airline security is not preventing you from getting dangerous items on board. :)

-A

ph-ndr

7th Jun 2006, 02:45

I see only one way out of this.
Strip all passengers and handcuff them to the seats!:}

Taken to the extreme this would be sensible security in securing the cabin and aircraft environment and seperating bad items from bad intentions. Of course you could construe the whole thing as unfair business practices, as this would give airlines like Cathay and Singapore Airlines a huge leverage over union and seniority based airlines like UA/AA/etc, if the rules were applied to crew too. ;)

-A

Jockflyer

7th Jun 2006, 09:32

PENKO

7th Jun 2006, 09:45

Jock, PH-NDR is the only one in this thread that has said something that hasn't been said a million times before. Something that makes sense. Not bad for SLF.

As to not poking your nose in other man's profession: since when are a bunch of pilots experts in security? ;) PH-NDR is not telling you how to fly, but you on the other hand, are certainly telling security how to secure...

I know we like complaining about things we do not really understand, but then do not be surprised that there will be people responding, maybe even lowly SLF's who may have a better uderstanding of reality.

Jockflyer

7th Jun 2006, 10:39

Penko, you are absolutely right! How rude of me to comment on an event which could have threatened the security of the aircraft I was flying. I should just keep that sort of thing to myself. Obviously, this was the wrong place to make any observation of that type. Bite me!!!

You 'll just have to forgive me for suggesting that as far as security is concerned, SLF might not have the same insight or direct interest on a day to day basis as I (or any other flight crew) do. Don't tell me I don't understand security. I know what I expect of security, and the events of the other day just don't cut it. I've been allowed on as a passenger with a leatherman. Is that OK?

The whole purpose of this forum, as I understand it, is to allow Professional Pilots to talk freely about things which affect their jobs/lives.

If you think that allowing pax onto an a/c with a pint glass, metal knives and forks is OK and shouldn't be disccussed, then I hope you are never in a position where you or a member of your crew are threatened with such.

If a pax is stupid enough to smuggle a pint glass onto the a/c, then he is probably drunk enough, and who is to say that if challenged, he would not use it as a weapon. Would you like to see your cabin crew with a broken glass in their face?

All this may very well have been discussed before, but if through talking about it, someone in a position to improve it listens, then surely its a good thing.

JF

VS1711

7th Jun 2006, 11:09

So what happens these days if a crazy stands up in flight clutching something that might or might not be a detonator (for example little black box with a big red button and an antenna) and declares that he's stashed a bomb in the hold and is prepared to blow everyone up he doesn't get access to the cockpit and a detour? Would anyone say "Security is ace; I don't believe you"?

You still get proper glasses and wine bottles on board anyway if you're prepared to pay for a premium cabin. I'm not sure if that's every airline but it's certainly true of BA

Jockflyer

7th Jun 2006, 11:29

VS1711,
Whilst on a BA flight from Stockholm-Heathrow flight my travelling partner asked if he could keep the knive and fork that we were given on board, to which the CC agreed. However, from Heathrow to GLasgow, they were taken off him at security, only to be given a new set on board again!
Madness.
JF

On speed on profile

7th Jun 2006, 12:21

Vs1711, I think that no pilot will ever open the door with a threat these days. 9/11 has shown people the worst case scenario when you chose to "detour", so you have a choice... Land, and take your chances or Submit and take your chances. The first is the better option IMHO and holds the chance that you and everyone else will survive if he is bluffing. The second, well, just take a look at 9/11.....

bealine

7th Jun 2006, 12:28

I had to laugh on my way into work last night! At Gatwick, there is an opportunity for airport staff to discuss "Security Improvement" with the BAA today between 09.00 and 14.00 (I'm on nights so no opportunity to go and amuse myself!)

What sort of a joke is this - at a time that Ferrovia are taking over and BAA is hell-bent on saving as many shekels as it can and shedding front-line jobs, how can it offer "Security Improvement"?

I think we, as airline staff, are going to have to be more vigilant than ever because the responsibility for our security has been given to retired servicemen (who, not intending being unkind here, couldn't pass a Battle Fitness Test any more) or economic migrants with no traceable Criminal Record Check because they haven't lived here for five years! Additionally, our own airlines are trying to break down every security barrier - self check in so that the passenger isn't seen by any staff till they are on the aeroplane!

Unfortunately, security takes second place to commercial pressures and I share Jockflyer's concerns!

WHBM

7th Jun 2006, 12:36

self check in so that the passenger isn't seen by any staff till they are on the aeroplane!
Bealine, is self check-in any less secure than asking passengers damn-fool questions like "Have the bags been with you at all times" when we have just entered the terminal from the coach (bags in the compartment underneath) or train (bags in the racks at the end of the coach, out of sight).

And we all know to answer "yes they have" because if we answer anything else our bags will be opened and the contents all mangled, and we will possibly miss our flight while waiting for this to be done as well, as a punishment for answering in any other manner than the prescribed one.

VS1711

7th Jun 2006, 15:57

This question is more for the paying punters but is there anyone else who would like to join the Iris scheme but finds it impossible to get to the enrolment office while they're open?

I pass the airside office at T4 at least once a week (sometimes two or three times) but always before they open at 0730. If it was land-side I'd make the trip at the weekend but as things stand I can't so I often stand for up to forty minutes at immigration on arrival home (of course the Fast Track shuts at lunchtime). Usually I don't see anyone using the Iris recognition in that time. Contrast this with Schiphol where their machines often have queues at peak time.

I asked the guy at immigration about it once. Apparently they've rented the cheapest space they could get their hands on.

ph-ndr

7th Jun 2006, 16:19

ph-ndr
As you are (self confessed) SLF, I would suggest that while you may have an opinion, I don't think it appropriate for you to come on a Professional Pilots website, and tell us that we should all stop commmenting on the lack of security which threatens us every day of our working life.

Sometimes we just want to have a moan about it. I myself just wanted to find out if others had a similar thing happen to them.

So, your comments are welcome, just don't tell (or suggest to) me what I can or can't say on a forum for my industry. I don't go on IT websites bumping my gums!

Cheers

JF
Calm down; I've not told anyone here to not complain or stop lamenting how the security measures impact us all on a daily basis. I do my share of travelling, at times more than do airline crews, and you have my full sympathy when it comes to blowing of steam. I certainly do, but i figured that instead of just reading another thread of rightfully frustrated people, crew, SLF or others, I'd try to shed a light on what todays airport/airline security actually is, and how most people misunderstand it for being the kind of security you have in a bank, where every risk is contained, seperated from threats and made foolproof. The one thing I did mention was that openly itemizing ways that passengers can easily gain access to objects and methods of applying these, is probably not in the safe interest of those who have to be put in those situaitions daily, as it would further undermine the task of trying to isolate your workplaces from direct danger.

Security is but a mindset, untill given context and motives by humans. In most cases following the money works quite well in sorting the context and motives.

Also, keep on piling on the good stories of how ignorant and stupid situations can crop up in the name of security, after all, when then day has wound down and the stress is gone, a good bit of these makes for a good laugh. ;)

And finally, I'd never tell you how to do your job, even though I know my share of security and also how it applies in this world, I have no grounds to tell anyone in here anything about how to fly a plane, or even comment on it. I've lurked here for a good few years and I'll mainly stick to that, but I felt I could add something by trying to shed some light on how airport/airline security is misunderstood on a daily basis by most people, even those who face it daily, either as proffesionals or SLF.

-A :)

bealine

7th Jun 2006, 16:37

Bealine, is self check-in any less secure than asking passengers damn-fool questions like "Have the bags been with you at all times"

I should bloody well say so! The damn-fool questions to which you refer are a "DfT requirement" (although not everyone now asks them)!

However, if nothing else, we are able to spot if someone has been drinking heavily or if someone appears excessively nervous or anxious! Passengers who make last minute bookings and travel with only light luggage need special scrutiny (based on previous history of terrorism) - particularly if they travel First or Business Class (front of aeroplane).

Bit by bit, the whole safety and security of our airports is being dismantled - sacrificed to the god of commercial pressure!

bantermanter

7th Jun 2006, 22:21

quote

Penko, you are absolutely right! How rude of me to comment on an event which could have threatened the security of the aircraft I was flying. I should just keep that sort of thing to myself. Obviously, this was the wrong place to make any observation of that type. Bite me!!!

JF ,how can a pint glass threaten the security of an aircraft.The most important thing to establish here is weather this "pint glass" contained a well knowen irish beer?
I have quite often walked onto an aircraft with a glass bottle containing either tango or coke.I also carry several pens,a heavy laptop and a hard back copy of the latest best selling novel..all these items could be used as lethal weapons.JF...ur name suggests your scottish,you have the most lethal weapon of all, the glasgow kiss(using your forehead to cause severe injury) for you english folks.
Im sure the safety of "your aircraft" wasnt under that much threat but by going on about this uve given a whole load of irish folks some really good ideas..get a grip and the next time u see an irish man with a pint glass thats empty offer to buy him a drink.

G-CPTN

7th Jun 2006, 22:27

OUR local airport (NCL EGNT) won't let you through 'security' with a capped cardboard cone of Costa coffee (not available 'airside').
Say it's 'for security'.
Have had to stand and finish a full cup before being allowed through. :ugh:

Ever been threatened with a cardboard cup of hot (but rapidly cooling) coffee?

icarus5

7th Jun 2006, 22:54

Recently at Stanstead as a passenger I had to give up a pair of very blunt-ended scissors which I had inadvertantly left in my crew bag. I felt like pointing out to these very bright secuity men that I could go and legally purchase a couple of glass bottles of say vodka, take them on board, go to the toilet, smash them, light the alcohol to start a fire and use the smashed bottle tops as far more serious and dangerous weapons than my blunt ended scissors.
If I had I would probably been arrested as a terrorist and at the very least missed my flight. So I kept quiet.This so called security is an expensive game to make us all feel more safe despite the fact that 3500 people die on the roads every year and thousands more injured (some for life) ie the equivalent to quite a large number of 747s crashing every year without a concern from anybody. So why is everybody feeling save when it is infinitely more dangerous than flying?

bealine

8th Jun 2006, 05:16

OUR local airport (NCL EGNT) won't let you through 'security' with a capped cardboard cone of Costa coffee (not available 'airside').

The reason for this, G-CPTN, was that a Daily Telegraph reporter smuggled a craft knife (sharp enough to cut someone's throat) through at Gatwick hidden in a capped cardboard cone of coffee - and it was Costa Coffee too! Sorry, but I side with the security guys on this issue!

VH-GRUMPY

8th Jun 2006, 06:27

When Canberra (Oz) first put in security gates to stop people wandering onto the airside at the GA gates they were concerned that pilots would forget the combination (push button) - so they engraved the combination on the lock.

Go figure - :p

bobdbuilder

8th Jun 2006, 06:59

In Geneva you can even buy Swiss knives beyond security !! When I asked the shop assistant how could it possibly be allowed, she replied that according to Swiss Law, you can have a Swiss knive in your possession on board an aircraft. Then, she showed me a list of airlines that do not accept that. So she added "unless you are flying with these.". This list included BA, but not my airline.

Sadly, I have to agree with ph-ndr. It is all a gimick to make people believe they are secure.

Bobdbuilder

ozangel

8th Jun 2006, 09:20

A girl I used to work with as crew used to LOVE security.

Every day she would pack her bag with half a dozen assorted sex toys, rush through the walk through scanner, then watch the faces of the screeners as her bag flashed up on screen.

Personally, I find that if I dress/pack appropriately, security is no hassel. Particularly if in uniform. Straight to the front of the line, bag goes straight through, no beeps if you have the right shoes/belt (can be hit and miss there), and bingo, a completely painless 30 second delay in getting to the aircraft.

I agree, its all a bit theatrical for my liking - especially when you walk past builders renovating an airside retail outlet, with their assorted 'saws', 'nail guns' and other fun dangerous toys laying about. If someone was very determined to do some damage, they could.

You are only supposedly protected if you fly on an airline/aircraft operating a service from a secured airport. I know that at least in this country, theres planes flying around with up to 99 pax on charter, with no screening.

garthicus

8th Jun 2006, 10:01

I've seen Handcuffs for sale in NBO airport in the dutyfree next to the gate.....

Jockflyer

8th Jun 2006, 12:36

BanterManter

If you don't know how a pint glass can be used as a weapon, then you haven't been drinking in some of the pubs near where I live. As an ex barman, I've seen what someone looks like with a smashed pint glass in their face, and I can tell you it's a lot worse than been hit with a hardback copy of the Da Vinci Code.

Its all a fuss about nothing until it happens to you.

JF

garthicus

8th Jun 2006, 13:25

Agreed jockflyer..

I saw a guys face turn into a bloody jigsaw puzzle with a pint glass to the face...

I also have seen a girls face and head destroyed by a pint glass dropped from a very short height...

BELHold

8th Jun 2006, 18:04

"HOw on earth did they get through security with that I thought!"
Jockflyer,
Whilst I understand your concerns I think you will probably find that they didn't get through security with the glass but purchased the Pint in the Airside bar then boarded your flight.
Boarding is usually handled by the Handling Agent and I am quite sure they would not have let someone onto the Apron holding a Pint, oh and don't CC greet pax and check boarding cards on the way onto the AC, surely they would of noticed this at that stage.
LDY - DUB is usually operated by the SF340, not many seats on this AC so surely the CC would of noticed this person consuming the Black Stuff on board??
Incidently you can purchase up to 5 yes thats 5 LTRs of Spirits at the Duty Free to take on board.
I think your gripe may be with Transec and not Security in this case.
I don't know if you have ever visited BFS but just before the search area there is a gift shop and they will happily sell you any Gods ammount of Guinness Glasses to take home as a momento.

FakePilot

8th Jun 2006, 18:36

Security is never perfect. However, a would-be criminal no longer has the guarantee that they'll be able to successfully slip a "reliable" weapon through.
What I mean by reliable is that it intimidates and when necessary can be used multiple times. Who would you rush first, a man with a glass, or a man with a knife?

However, I do agree that used properly one on one a glass would be nasty. :)

Charles Darwin

11th Jun 2006, 23:08

Cabin attendants and pilots go through screening. Then, once on board, they are trusted to do a security search (at least with some airlines).
There is something here that does not add up.:oh:

boofhead

12th Jun 2006, 00:25

You can have perfect airport security (no weapons or potential weapons allowed) but it has nothing whatsoever to do with airplane security.
For example an attempted hijack was thwarted by the cabin crew when three unarmed men broke into the flight deck of a 737 and started to bash the pilots. If those guys had closed and locked the door behind them they would have succeeded. So how could airport security have stopped this attempt? Answer; they could not.
An attempt was made to set alight an airplane using a bottle of petrol (a bottle of aclohol would have worked as well). The perp poured the petrol over the seats and theatened to set it alight. The cabin crew again to the rescue. And what value airport security? None. Once you are airborne those cretins are totally useless.
A successful hijacking was done using a tv remote control ("I have a bomb etc"), and others have been attempted using chopsticks, asthma inhalers, etc. Knives, laptop computers, shoes (and that one was a farce: there is no proof that the shoes would have exploded. Most likely, even if they had been set alight, they would have just smoked. The FBI destroyed them pretty quick, maybe to prevent us from seeing how they were not a real threat), metal belt buckles, cellphones and so on are rarely used and hardly ever (never?) successfully used.
All a hijacker needs is the right attitude and he (usually always a he) has a chance. Taking away the means to fight from the cabin crew and passengers is insane. Creating a mind-set that the authorities, if we give up all our freedoms and rights, will protect us, is the plan and it does not work (well, creating the mind-set is easy, but protecting us in the air by making us criminals at the ariport will never work). The airplane would be completely safe if every passenger had a gun or big knife. No hijacker would be game to stand up. If only one armed person had been on board those airplanes on 9/11 (and I don't mean the idiots who are paid to be air marshalls) it would have been a squib.
The only real result from 9/11 is that it has turned us into cowards.

Ron & Edna Johns

12th Jun 2006, 01:34

Absolutely right, boofhead. We have turned into a society of frightened, humbled, downtrodden cowards. And I include fellow tech-crew in that. Can you believe I've seen CAPTAINS peer through the peek-hole and delay going to the toilet because a SIX-YEAR-OLD CHILD was outside the door?? I've seen Captains refuse to go speak with passengers, even to say "hello", because it might be "a security risk". My God....! Here in Aus, security nazis are now confiscating pilots' Maglite torches.... You know, the things you need to do walk-arounds with.... And rather than stand up to these people we meekly hand them over. And instead of our company getting on our side and dealing with issues like this they threaten us with DISMISSAL if you refuse to comply with security!

Historians of the future will look back at this era in astonishment. Astonishment at what a pathetic society we turned into.

I'm embarrassed to be a part of it.

Charles Darwin

12th Jun 2006, 16:20

Ron & Edna Johns: How true. Sad but true. :sad:
Just few weeks ago I was yelled at by an Air Canada first officer, because at the same time I was opening the toilet door he emerged from the cockpit. He screamed and looked like he was going to pull a karate stunt on me, then slammed the cockpit door, very terrified. So was I. All I said to him was "good morning".

hasta lueGO

12th Jun 2006, 19:15

I can't get over the fact that JOCKFLYER even started this post. What's his issue? Since when have pint glasses been a security risk? Yes,ofcourse it could potentially be used as a weapon - but so could a duty free bottle, a china plate, a belt, a hair grip etc etc - pleeeease!

bantermanter

12th Jun 2006, 22:50

hasta lueGO

thank you very much,you are abosulutly correct,why JockFlyer started this post I'l never no..so many other things on an aeroplane can be used as a weapon,this type of scaremongering doesnt do any of us any good..Jockflyer you say uve worked as a barman? mmm maybe you should learn to leave what happens at work at work instead of declaring how much you thought your life was in danger on an open forum.:

bluemic

13th Jun 2006, 04:36

Charles Dee says:

" He screamed and looked like he was going to pull a karate stunt on me, then slammed the cockpit door, very terrified. So was I. All I said to him was "good morning". "

Could it be that he didn't understand what Sabaah al-khayr means? ;)

Jockflyer

13th Jun 2006, 10:26

BanterManter and Hasta LueGO,

If you think the thread is pointless, why bother to read it, and then feel the need to post complaining about it.:ugh:

All I did was post a concern about what I belieive was pointless and inconsistant security. Some agree some don't, no big deal, but why you getting into such a fuss about me wanting to discuss it?:hmm:

The whole purpose of this forum is to allow people to talk about things which affect them in their job. So,if we all leave our issues at work behind, then their would be no need for the forum.

If you don't like a topic, don't read it, OR go post something of your own which interests you. If this topic bothers you soooo much, then perhaps you need to chill a bit.:ok:

Cheers
JF:E

boofhead

14th Jun 2006, 06:22

It is hard to believe anyone gives this insanity any credence at all, much less tries to defend it. Airport security is just the tip of the iceberg. We let them get away with this, we give up so much.
The bigger picture is Homeland Security (and whatever it is called in other countries) modelled after the same system used in Nazi Germany. It is the biggest government department in the US and has control of so much, including immigration, law enforcement, and even, through the "War" on drugs, the military. They have the power to lock people up without charging them, take away people's jobs (pilots, especially) and so much more. The ultimate of course is the several invasions of small countries like Iraq and the subsequent deaths of hundreds of thousands, many innocent women and children. Illegal wire-tapping is one way they maintain control, but for the most part they do what the nazis did. Goebels was asked how they (the nazis) managed to control the German people so successfully, allowing them to slaughter millions of innocents and start a major war (remind you of anything?) and the reply was that all it took was to tell the population they were under threat and to attack some foreign nation.
Parallels, anyone?

StarWinder

19th Jun 2006, 08:04

How about this for "security":

In India, as a normal pax, you cannot even take nail clippers (!) on a plane. However, as a Sikh, you may take on your Kirpan (ceremonial dagger) plus as many long hairpins (for securing your turban) as you like.

Of course, we know that Sikhs would never hijack or even blow up a plane ;) but that's another issue:ok:

HZ123

19th Jun 2006, 09:00

Much of what is being said by some refer to the USA, where security has always been very poor and to some extent still is. In the UK sure there are many times when one can question the procedures or actions that take place. however, in the main within the UK the various agencies employed in aviation security have perfomed well, long may they do so. Futhermore some of the remarks on this thread do the aviation community a great disservice with the ramblings of some of the contributers. There is nothing new on this subject?

ATCO1987

26th Jun 2006, 20:08

At Bristol we do not allow covered drinks into the RZ. I.E. Cups of take away tea and coffee with lids on, open cans of coke etc etc.

Airport security will never be fool proof, at the end of the day we are only a deterrant, but it is significantly harder for a terrorist to succeed with their plans than it used to be!

As for petrol, how did that get on board? Thats dirty cargo, it cannot travel AT ALL.

As for quickly getting through security by not wearing certain shoes or belts that may activate the AMD, you can forget it! Thanks to Smiths detection, there are now AMD's that activate at random! They are a pain in the backside. Not to worry!