Uk Airport Chaos (hand wringing thread) [Archive]

Bucket

10th Aug 2006, 05:55

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 06:15

'Baby milk' has to be sampled before being allowed on board. :E

Xeque

10th Aug 2006, 06:19

Well that should help the lobby that want's us all to stop flying because of the greenhouse gasses we generate (probably caused by airline food :})

It's going to harm the low cost internal and inter-european flights most though. When in Europe on business I've travelled many times carrying only a briefcase which contains my 1500 GBP laptop computer and everything else I need. There is absolutely no way I am going to entrust that to baggage handlers as hold baggage so, bye bye low cost airlines. I'm going to have to go by train instead and my clients are going to have to accept the delay and the inevitable increase in my fees due to the extended travel times and having to consider hotel accommodation as well.

So sad that we are the victims of cretins. :sad:

LTNman

10th Aug 2006, 06:26

As of 7:25 local not a single departure yet from Luton with so sign of any departures soon.

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 06:30

Bucket

the passenger security at UK airports is pathetic and once again we have to rely on our transatlantic cousins to show us how to do it.

You must be joking.

DCS99

10th Aug 2006, 06:34

Bucket,

"Also means a greater emphasis on checking in early and spending less time in duty free or some bar getting plastered before the flight.

It's been a long time coming; the passenger security at UK airports is pathetic and once again we have to rely on our transatlantic cousins to show us how to do it."

Are you for real??

EGLD

10th Aug 2006, 06:35

Well that should help the lobby that want's us all to stop flying because of the greenhouse gasses we generate (probably caused by airline food :})
It's going to harm the low cost internal and inter-european flights most though. When in Europe on business I've travelled many times carrying only a briefcase which contains my 1500 GBP laptop computer and everything else I need. There is absolutely no way I am going to entrust that to baggage handlers as hold baggage so, bye bye low cost airlines. I'm going to have to go by train instead and my clients are going to have to accept the delay and the inevitable increase in my fees due to the extended travel times and having to consider hotel accommodation as well.
So sad that we are the victims of cretins. :sad:

Every laptop anyone in my company has (stupidly) checked into the hold of an aircraft has gone missing

L337

10th Aug 2006, 06:36

the passenger security at UK airports is pathetic

Bucket, You must live in an alternate universe.

L337

Rwy in Sight

10th Aug 2006, 06:36

I am not following something here. Those rules about the female sanitary items and tissues unboxed? Where a pax is suppose to carry them? Female garmets tend not to have too large pockets.

In the same note contact lens holders, without bottles of solution. The solution to remove the contacts is esssential. What do you do if you need to remonve the glasses.

How much money the post security shop and BAA are going to make out of this ban?

Rwy in Sight

LTNman

10th Aug 2006, 06:41

It is already clear that at this level of security airports cannot function. I expect some sort of relaxation sometime tomorrow.

Rhiannon

10th Aug 2006, 06:50

in the US at least, hand baggage and handbags get better searching than luggage put in the cargo hold. How is preventing hand baggage going to stop anyone so sickly inclined to do harm?

Gerontocrat

10th Aug 2006, 06:56

I've asked this question on another thread: Who is going to be responsible for damage or, more importantly, theft from checked bags. Many women carry their jewellery in hand baggage, as advised by the airlines.

jimma

10th Aug 2006, 07:05

It is going to be an inconvenience, but the banning of hand luggage isnt the end of the world. I wouldnt trust my laptop or camera to the airlines, so I wont be taking them for the time being. Security on all flights is paramount!

I think the media are doing their usual job of making everything seem 10 times worse than it actually is.

x12

10th Aug 2006, 07:07

Whilst I understand the reasons behind this, why would it not be possible to carry on board items purchased airside AFTER being security-checked? A five-hour flight without any reading material or non-airline bottled refreshment will be quite dire.
I imagine that Duty-free shops will be closed for a while.

Doubt it... after removing all items at security no doubt you can buy it all again in the duty free shops ! profit, profit, profit...... now if they closed the duty free shops, that would show it was real.........

Jinkster

10th Aug 2006, 07:10

After major terrorism threats and events - people become very complacent with what they should be looking for after a time......

:hmm:

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 07:11

Jimma

It may be an inconvenience for you, but for many business travellers, the inability to take a laptop in the cabin is somewhat more than that.

If this continues for long, it will have severe consequences for UK air travel, as the business community finds other ways to work around the blocker.

The impact on Ryanair and others will be interestng to observe, bye bye 20 minute turnarounds for the time being, methinks.

warkman

10th Aug 2006, 07:13

cwatters

10th Aug 2006, 07:20

Gosh these restrictions are tough. I see you aren't even allowed to take car keys if they have a wireless remote capability. Must be loads of people turning up at security with those in their pocket.

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 07:21

tilewood

10th Aug 2006, 07:24

Score one for the good guys. :ok:

Maybe. But it shows the level of disruption that a perceived threat
can cause to our 'advanced' society! :hmm:

Dirty Mach

10th Aug 2006, 07:25

As far as is being reported, the threat was neutralised this morning. So as far as I can see this is all designed to remind the public how scared they should be, and that they mustn't question Tony's foreign policy/police state ID card scheme/immigration policy/insert contaversial scheme here

Talking of Tony, does anyone think it's a coincidence that he just managed to get to Barbados before all this happened?

And since he's away will the Deputy PM be handling things in his absence? God help us... :{ :{ :{

AfricanSkies

10th Aug 2006, 07:26

The policy of no liquids appears to be especially relevant here, right down to 'no contact lens solution'. Sounds like the cretins hatched a plan involving liquid explosive, or liquid flammables. :uhoh:

jimma

10th Aug 2006, 07:26

flybywire

10th Aug 2006, 07:26

This was just issued - at 0615z today... LHR Short-haul flights of 3 hours or less are prohibited UFN. A review will be taking place within 2 hours. What a mess...
Pity to the innocent travellers, the economy, and all crew and staff involved, but safety first.
Cheers,
R.D.

Definitely.
I do feel for all my colleagues and all the passengers involved, but these measures are necessary, at least to discourage bad people from acting at this time.

keepitlit

10th Aug 2006, 07:27

Good result,however I have lived with this type of theat most of my life and as our national security do a very good job they have to be lucky all the time and those Bas***ds only have to be lucky once.

Keep the good work up guys and its up to us to be very vigilant.

Rgds

K.I.L.

Jet II

10th Aug 2006, 07:29

Jinkster

10th Aug 2006, 07:31

How can banning hand baggage be as crippling as aircraft blowing up in mid air? Yes, there will be significant disruption for a while, but, as always, the aviation industry will work through it, sort out what needs to be done, and make it happen.

I can understand it can be a problem however I cant see the business chappies among the world travelling by sea.....

AfricanSkies

10th Aug 2006, 07:34

so are the airlines going to remove all the bottles of Scotch, Vodka etc?

Sounds like it. Perhaps they are concerned that the contents might not be what is indicated on the label.

Banning duty free spirits would be a good thing anyway - imagine what damage a few bottles of burning spirits could do in a toilet ceiling. Pax could buy their spirits on arrival at duty free instead.

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 07:36

Jinkster

You need to get your little Britain blinkers off, UK business people may have no chouice, but those from other countries do.

The UK relies on a lot of premium transfer traffic, who can reroute via AMS, PAR, FRA.

Do you think that those travellers are going to be attracted by (a) loads of hassle and (b) the news that somone had a serious plot to blow them up?

Wot No Engines

10th Aug 2006, 07:37

I can understand it can be a problem however I cant see the business chappies among the world travelling by sea.....

No, but those who can avoid travelling will, and those who transit through the UK - huge numbers do to get from the US to Europe, Asia and Africa will change to flights going through another hub - and these will be those paying the most.

I see BA hurting very quickly.

Llademos

10th Aug 2006, 07:43

How can banning hand baggage be as crippling as aircraft blowing up in mid air?

Because both occurences (note that these new aarrangements are causing severe delays) both stop the air transport system from functioning viably.

I am not comparing the severity of the events, just the severity of the consequences.

Got it now?

F3G - yes, got it now and before as well.

When the skies are cleared of all air traffic for 3-4 days (as it was post 911 and would be if aircraft started to fall out of the skies) due to the hand baggage restrictions, I will concede you have a point.

747-436

10th Aug 2006, 07:44

If in the USA all liquids are banned does that include water etc?? Surely this is a flight safety issue with crew not having access to that on flights?

A2QFI

10th Aug 2006, 07:45

If "stuff" is dangerous in some way, how does it become safe by being put in the hold? Inability to carry car keys with remote controls will cause some grief too!

Gerontocrat

10th Aug 2006, 07:47

They'll just have to WEAR it (or will worn jewellery be banned)?
The problem is with brooches that have pins - particularly today.

Genghis the Engineer

10th Aug 2006, 07:47

Banning duty free spirits would be a good thing anyway - imagine what damage a few bottles of burning spirits could do in a toilet ceiling. Pax could buy their spirits on arrival at duty free instead.
Yes, or a broken bottle is a much nastier weapon than a nailfile!

On the laptops issue, I have to say that my experience must be much better than everybody else's - I usually check everything in except for in-flight reading matter, my camera and my flying logbook and licences (if I'm travelling with them); I've yet to lose anything. But, for those who have had a problem, it's probably a very safe assumption that the level of police supervision of the checked-in baggage, during the current fun and games, will be really quite tight indeed!

In the meantime, I'm going to believe that this was genuine, necessary, the threat was real and that even if today wasn't the terrorists planned operational day, it had to be assumed that they might have a backup "go now" plan if part of the gang were rumbled. So, on that basis well done the good guys.

Now my own tiny note of discord. If these precautions have got to continue for long (which I hope isn't the case), please airlines could we have a decent supply of reading matter, pens and scribbling paper on board - or I'll go mad on a long trip!

G

Tom the Tenor

10th Aug 2006, 07:49

Politicians are making and controlling the news on this one and you can bet that Blair and the Labour Party are spinning this new threat in a fashion that suits their own agenda.

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 07:50

When the skies are cleared of all air traffic for 3-4 days (as it was post 911 and would be if aircraft started to fall out of the skies) due to the hand baggage restrictions, I will concede you have a point.

The 9/11 aircraft did not explode in middair, to refresh your memory, they were flown into buildings killing many thousands, a completely different situation, that's why the US locked down the airspace.

You are making an illogical point and I am not going to waste anymore bandwith arguing with you.

BTW, Heathrow is now closed to incoming flights for your info.

Jordan D

10th Aug 2006, 07:51

Tom the tenor - maybe those remarks should be put in Jet Blast, and not here?

Jordan

Genghis the Engineer

10th Aug 2006, 07:51

Hard to understand why specifically. As I understand it, the current security threat seems to be primarily targetted at flights to/from the USA.

G

lexxity

10th Aug 2006, 07:52

Do you honestly think that if these measures weren't neccesary they would be put into operation? If the terrorists had managed to go ahead with their plot then what would you be saying. I assume that the prohibition of liquids has something to do with a chemical reaction or the flamability of same. If they are in the hold then maybe they can't be activated.

Yes it is a disruption for the passengers, but better a disruption than the kind of thing we saw on 9/11.

sugden

10th Aug 2006, 07:57

Cahlibahn

10th Aug 2006, 08:00

It's being reported that all the arrested were booked on consecutive flights from various UK airports (LHR, GLA & MAN were mentioned) to the US on US carriers.

Genghis the Engineer

10th Aug 2006, 08:00

John Reid's knee has jerked so hard that he's kicked himself in the face.
Terrorists try to blow up planes... my god, you're joking! What will they think of next?!?!
A bomb in a handbag will blow up in the hold as well as the cabin. Either way, you're screwed.
So putting handbaggage in the hold is not the answer. Reviewing screening and security, in a calm and rational manner, is the answer. Anything less and the terrorists win.
If we reacted like this when faced with an issue at 35,000 ft we'd nose into the ground in seconds. :ugh:

Actually you are probably wrong.

Firstly, if something was designed to be set-off manually (which would be logical if carried on hand-baggage) there is no potential to operate it whilst in the hold.

Secondly, modern airline holds are designed to contain quite substantial explosions without endangering the main pressurised/structural section of the aircraft. No certainties, but a small IED in the hold is far less likely to bring the aeroplane down than the same in the cabin.

G

Final 3 Greens

10th Aug 2006, 08:00

Lexx

I'm only commenting on the consequences of the action taken.

That's not saying the action is unecessary.

Adamant

10th Aug 2006, 08:01

From what I've read (them banning car key's with remote controls built in, electronic key fobs etc), it sounds like they expected a remote detonator to be carried onboard.

Perhaps they were somehow able to get something into the hold and only needed to carry the detonator? In which case, stopping them carrying that will prevent the device from going off?

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 08:04

More booga booga for the masses := Give us your trust (even though we are the most hated, incompetent government to date) or Dem Ter'rur'rists, they gonna getcha and hurcha!

Rest assured this will end up in to the pile of all other so-called "terror plots" for which there have been no charges but plenty of damage to community relations.

Meanwhile other headlines: 'Israel seizes south Lebanon town' and 'Iraq troops under-equipped'. Damn fine moment to tell us about something that has been in the plans for 'several months' !

beamer

10th Aug 2006, 08:05

Let us hope that when this current problem settles down a little we see a significant reduction in the ludicrous amount of 'hand luggage' that is hauled onto aircraft each and every flight. Once passengers are aware of the new situation (obviously not today) in theory at least once checked in, their passage through security should be relatively smooth.

To the contributor who wondered how long Britain has been governed by the Scots (see earlier post) - you obviously have not been paying attention !!

blue up

10th Aug 2006, 08:09

As an ex Boy-Scout type, my flghtbag is full of STUFF (spare shirt, razor, toothbrush, mini bottle of antibacterial handwipe etc etc). Will I need to empty it out? I feel there may be a call from crewing today!!

Are crew getting "super searched" or just scanned?

They took my toothpicks off me 2 weeks ago but the same day saw the same security team allowing 4 of our passengers to board a different 737 on the far side of the airport.

Events like these do actually highlight the failings in the system, hopefully before the naughty boys find them. I don't object to the inconvenience, although I may seem to when I'm in the queue. On a security course we were told that security cannot prevent terrorists but it acts as a deterrent by making it seem easier to go and find a softer target. They said that an occasional refusal-to-enter of a cleaner/handling agent for non-compliance with ID Card regulaions will give an airline an image as a security conscious airline, thus making a different airline a more attractive target.
An effective security agent is the one who makes a nuisance of him/herself but does the job thoroughly. Playing patty-cake on your arms to search for knives is counterproductive. It has to be done properly or not at all (well, actually, done properly only)

Booze. Why do we carry it and sell it onboard? I've never grasped why it isn't a case of selling a ticket that can be redeamed on landing. Anyone?

docash1983

10th Aug 2006, 08:09

Reports are vague, so please excuse me. News reports have stated that they have closed due to congestion, so god only knows when they could re-open. It is sure to have a very large knock on effect with aircraft diversions:ugh: .

luoto

10th Aug 2006, 08:09

beamer: fair point as long as it is matched with greater liability for carriers, traceability and strict penalties for those caught liberating said items.
But today is not the place to discuss.

Atlanta-Driver

10th Aug 2006, 08:10

I sincerely hope that this measure is not permanent. However if it is I have flown my last flight with BA. I will not check my navbag in the hold, period. I carry digital camera, laptop and a variety of other stuff including licenses, medicals. Any company that demands these items are not allowed in the Cabin and with security randomly opening bags is not worth traveling with. I can see trains in Central Europe becoming more and more popular for positioning crews around as well as everyday travellers.

AD

warkman

10th Aug 2006, 08:11

More booga booga for the masses := Give us your trust (even though we are the most hated, incompetent government to date) or Dem Ter'rur'rists, they gonna getcha and hurcha!

Or maybe something more sinister??? :p :p

Tony talking to john Ried:- " john, we have lost the trust and vote of the people. that damned Brown is after my job. Time to put plan B into action"
Reid "What? the Coup? close down the airports, bring in the troops and arrest the Royal family? declare a state of emergency and do it whilst Parliament is on holiday? Fantastic Idea Comrade Blair" :} :} :}

cortilla

10th Aug 2006, 08:12

ok so what do they know the we don't. Why on earth close the a/p to all incoming flights??? Unless this plot was supposed to happen today, and they're worried that some people slipped thru the net. Surely then close it to departing flights as well. ANd i'm not trying to scare monger or stir, i'm really curious. But hey i'm in holland at the moment, so not that affected to be fair.

GROUNDHOG

10th Aug 2006, 08:13

Can anyone confirm that all flights out of Brussels have also been cancelled please?

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 08:14

Give it a BREAK warkman :ugh:

Wiley

10th Aug 2006, 08:15

I haven't read all four pages of this thread, so apologies if this point has already been made, but it has occurred to me that in foiling this threat before a half dozen aircraft are lost in mid-Atlantic, the UK police are victims of their own success.

My point is, most people, and quite a large slice of the media, will react to this in the same way they have reacted to the recent 'chemical lab' raid in East London - criticising the police because they didn't find anything.

My prediction? Some slick lawyer will get the people arrested off from most of the charges because there won't be sufficient proof for a court of law, and the poor bloody plods will get no credit for possibly stopping these people before they could carry out their plans. Ask yourselfd what the world's reaction would have been if the US authorities had arrested all the September 11th hijackers at the airport and stopped them befor they carried out their plans? Well meaning US lawyers would have had every one of them released within 24 hours.)

I said it after the East London raid and I'l say it here again - the bad guys don't have to actually carry out these threats any more. They could damn near finance their terror organisations entirely by sooling police onto some of their mates who will make a point of having absolutely no incriminating evidence in their homes and then sue the police for compensation for wrongful arrest.

In the meantime, they achieve their aim twofold:

1. The public get more disillusioned (and disbelieving) with the constant (false?) calls of 'wolf' by the police, and
2. The disruption these 'false' alerts cause is almost as effective as the act itself.

PS: I hadn't read 'warkman's' post when I wrote the messsage above, but it would seem he's proven my point.

simoncooldude

10th Aug 2006, 08:17

Can anyone confirm that all flights out of Brussels have also been cancelled please?

Just looked, but can't actually find anything on it. I know it was mentioned on Sky News about 30 minutes ago, but nothing on the Brussels website, BBC, Sky or anything on Google!

cortilla

10th Aug 2006, 08:32

Just heard on belgian radio. All flights from Zaventem to the UK have temporarily been cancelled.

warkman

10th Aug 2006, 08:32

Give it a BREAK warkman :ugh:

:} :} :8 :8 :E :E :} :} :ok:

MyData

10th Aug 2006, 08:36

On the subject of inbound flights - I understand they have been cancelled if still on the ground as the stands at UK airports are now full.

Something was brewing on this yesterday. My wife visited central London from Leeds and commented last night on how many police cars were positioned on the M62 and major junctions en-route to Leeds, and then how many officers were at Leeds station lining the platforms - way more than the usual amounts. When we awoke to the news this morning it does match up, suggesting they were making a visible statement to anyone who might have been planning to get to an airport.

Dirty Mach

10th Aug 2006, 08:39

I'm with warkman on this, and since commandant Danny has banished us all to jetblast, I can say so too!:cool:

flying_tyger

10th Aug 2006, 08:41

Im just thinking of the effect this is going to have on business over all - not just airlines and business men/women.

I send a lot of aircargo, and was supposed to send cargo with BA - hold space for handluaggage = less cargo holdspace? knock one effects of this means more shipping, means less availability. Chaos all round!

FT

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 08:43

Extra Police yesterday may well have been 'football' associated.

warkman

10th Aug 2006, 08:43

PS: I hadn't read 'warkman's' post when I wrote the messsage above, but it would seem he's proven my point.

My post was tongue in cheek!! :ugh: :ugh:

XL319

10th Aug 2006, 08:43

I was lucky, I travelled from LHR and LGW yesterday...could have been a lot worse if i travelled today. I thinkif they banned hand luggage all together it would settle down in being the norm before long. No reason why people need to carry lotions in their hand luggage unless its for medicinal purposes.

Washington_Irving

10th Aug 2006, 08:44

I flew to Seattle last week via Minneapolis from Gatwick. Was very impressed by security at USA, and certainly at the gate for the North West flight at the Gatwick end. It's about time we all adjusted to the new cicumstances that we now find oursleves in and I for one will be glad to see an end to pax trying to heave on vast rucksacks and other paraphenalia into the overhead lockers all under the guise of 'hand luggage'. :D
Also means a greater emphasis on checking in early and spending less time in duty free or some bar getting plastered before the flight.
It's been a long time coming; the passenger security at UK airports is pathetic and once again we have to rely on our transatlantic cousins to show us how to do it.

Does that include systems like the one in LAX where somebody checks your ID at the foot of the escalator and somebody else checks it at the top?:D All I've done is travel 30ft in a straight line in the open, with nobody around me. What could I have possibly done in those intervening 10 seconds? T:mad: ts.

US security, especially the TSA, are thieving, incompetant- yet thouroughly officious- monkeys.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 08:50

Whilst I realise that the contributers to Jet Blast are considered to be the lowest of the low and that our presence is only tolerated here, I think that the imposed title of this shifted thread is not only patronising but degrading also..

Onwards and Downwards. :mad:

luoto

10th Aug 2006, 08:50

warkman

10th Aug 2006, 08:53

Every laptop anyone in my company has (stupidly) checked into the hold of an aircraft has gone missing

I can see a huge increase in sales of professional metal camera cases....

sir.pratt

10th Aug 2006, 08:54

I totally agree, I am in the fortunate position whereby if I dont take my laptop on business travel, I can live with out it, but I know many people who cant.

funny, i always thought that food shelter and water were the essentials of life. never heard of a laptop being part of that group

MyData

10th Aug 2006, 08:56

Extra Police yesterday may well have been 'football' associated.

Not at 0630 for the 0700 train.

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 09:01

Ah! Conceded!

BBC Radio Five have just highlighted the vulnerability of valuable items within checked baggage (and that travel insurance probably won't cover them). The light-fingered baggage handlers are going to have a field day (or two).

gingernut

10th Aug 2006, 09:03

Danny check your inbox

Washington_Irving

10th Aug 2006, 09:08

outofsynch

10th Aug 2006, 09:17

What some people seem to have missed here, is that terrorists are unlikely to board the aircraft with an assembled IED. So moving handbaggage to the hold would prevent assembly of said device. Key fobs/mobiles etc would more than likely have contained require electronics. Does that make sense? Or is it just me? :confused:

EPRman

10th Aug 2006, 09:18

Quote from the TV news: "All those arrested are British born Muslims".
Why should we all suffer? Why not simply ban Muslims from taking bags onto the aeroplane? When they're inconvenienced like this, the majority of law abiding Muslims might then do something about the Islamonazi minority in this country. Maybe then the Muslim community 'leaders' and Imams may actually start to condemn those who preach hatred and start to rein them in. Before the liberals amongst you start accusing me of Islamophobia and the rest of the nonsense we have to put up with in this country, remember it's not Christians, Seikhs, Buddhists and the rest who are plotting to blow up aeroplanes and threatening death and destruction to the West. For a so called peaceful religion Islam is very big on death and killing.

Lon More

10th Aug 2006, 09:19

I'd rather be a couple of hours late in this world than fifteeen years early in the next, so it's going to be a case of "put up or shut up" for the next few weeks.
If the threat is real, and nothing had been done and a couple of aircraft had been hi-jacked, then the Blair-kockers would really have something to bitch about.
Is your journey really necessary? Whatever happpened to video conferencing? Are a lot of the complaints coming from the "look at me, I'm so important my company sends me round the world to discuss the price of widgets" brigade?
Read the thread on the Mil. Forum about an expected raised threat level this month.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 09:19

Hey warkman again !!

I can see a huge increase in sales of professional metal camera cases....

My problem exactly.

As my kit increases, I have been forced to by a rolling Resin Plastic case which now sits happily in the hold, but at about 10k value, what happens when it is nicked !!!!!

:mad:

Edited to add :- I understand exactly where you are coming from EPR Man. I was simply too afraid to raise the issue myself.

Profiling should be the watchword.

IB4138

10th Aug 2006, 09:24

Isn't it curious that the UK Government waited until Tony Bliar had flown off on his holiday before launching the operation......can't have Tony held up can they!! :suspect:

The other problem is that the Home Secretary, John Reed, has no credibility with a large number of people, so why let him loose on the media, with an insincere broadcast.

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 09:29

green granite

10th Aug 2006, 09:33

Isn't it curious that the UK Government waited until Tony Bliar had flown off on his holiday before launching the operation......can't have Tony held up can they!! :suspect:

Thats it, with Blair out of the way and the country in chaos two shags can mount a coup and then ban Blair from coming back :ok::rolleyes:

EPRman

10th Aug 2006, 09:37

Superpilot,

I'm certainly not a prat. My post was deliberately simplistic, but I think most can see the point. I think it's safe to assume that Mr and Mrs Smith off to Tenerife for a week with their three kids are not going to blow up aeroplanes.

Regards.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 09:39

You are 100% correct Superpilot Not all Muslims are brown coloured and black bearded, ya prat

However, the overwhelming majority of terrorist atrocities originate from Muslim Groups.

This is where the problem lies for Muslims worldwide. Whether they like it or not, they will all be viewed as potential terrorists.

What steps will they take to avoid this.

:mad:

Craggenmore

10th Aug 2006, 09:40

Not all Muslims are brown coloured and black bearded, ya prat

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/27/inv.suspects/

green granite

10th Aug 2006, 09:41

Does this affect holiday charter flights? or just scheduled flights?

Capt.KAOS

10th Aug 2006, 09:43

My sympathy is with the flying crew who has to cope with the pressure of danger every day on this route.

etrang

10th Aug 2006, 09:43

Quote from the TV news: "All those arrested are British born Muslims".
Why should we all suffer? Why not simply ban Muslims from taking bags onto the aeroplane?

And how do you suggest they identify the muslims?

Security screener: Are you muslim
Terrorist: No, mate, i'm catholic.
Security screener: OK, on you go.

Or do you want all muslims to be tattooed on the forehead at birth? Which still wouldn't have stopped Richard Reid the shoe bomber.

arcniz

10th Aug 2006, 09:44

I'd rather be a couple of hours late in this world than fifteeen years early in the next

Good for you Lon! Reality wins in the long count.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 09:51

Etrang, there is always "The Bacon Buttie test"

Hat, coat, gonsies :{

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 09:55

the overwhelming majority of terrorist atrocities originate from Muslim Groups

This is for a wider discussion one which starts of with a definition of "terrorist" and "atrocity". We all know, Mr Whitey is never wrong and always right, so let's not get started shall we. :mad:

jabird

10th Aug 2006, 09:57

“The impact on Ryanair and others will be interestng to observe, bye bye 20 minute turnarounds for the time being, methinks.”

To go back to this point, I doubt it will be that much of a problem for the aircraft, as all the checks are taking place in the terminal. The final check at the gate only applies to US flights atm.

BA & FR shares both down 3-4% atm, but I'm sure they will recover quite quickly once the threat status subsides.

Luoto:

“Surely with integration there is no community leader... after all, if it is a white British person they don't go and tell the priest do they ?”

Excellent point.

mucatron

10th Aug 2006, 10:05

A remote detonator would be easy to spot by security, the baggage carts as well as taking a small brunt of any explosion would also act as a faraday cage and hopefully block a mobile signal. Hand assembly and detonation would be the method of choice.

The news is reporting that possessions brought by passengers are being transferred into the hold.
Apart from the fact that this prevents hand luggage from being in the cabin - is there a real safety reason why everything should go in the 'belly' of the plane?
i.e. should a device be smuggled into the hold that could be detonated - is there more chance of the crew being able to land an aircraft rather than it occurring in the cabin? (i.e. is the hold designed to withstand an explosion to a greater degree than where the pax sit?)

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 10:05

the overwhelming majority of terrorist atrocities originate from Muslim Groups

I could narrow this down with all sorts of verbs, adjectives and qualifications. But as a broad sweep, I think most free thinking, sentient human beings, would pretty much understand what is being said.

deathcruzer

10th Aug 2006, 10:11

:mad: In afraid our political correctness ….our fear of upsetting minority groups is going to get some of us killed. As I see it the Terrorist all come from one such group and Restrictions need to be put on them .Until we see some better self policing of these groups then I am in favor of more draconian government measures. I will as everyone feel for the moderates, but we are at war…make no mistake about that. If this continues and we don’t take a harder stance…… they will get lucky…….:sad:

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 10:17

I think most free thinking, sentient human beings, would pretty much understand what is being said.

Your judgment is clouded and no doubt affected by external factors. Do you not watch TV, read the papers? You telling me in the face of all that you remain a free thinker? Go on, tell me it's not a question of 'sides' :ok:

I am in favor of more draconian government measures

'Nuff said

Lon More

10th Aug 2006, 10:18

Arkroyal But do you know what a British Muslim looks like?
IFIRC the shoe bomber was a convert to Islam so under your criteria he would get through

Arkroyal

10th Aug 2006, 10:20

But was he crew?
I'll remove my comment as it will result in the usual thread creep and knee-jerk racist rubbish

Mercenary Pilot

10th Aug 2006, 10:24

Only yesterday the Muslim community were complaining that the police were victimising them with stop and search.......:mad:

Now we know why!

(Mods: Delete this post if you feel im overstepping the mark)

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 10:28

Superpilot this is real life. It is happening to people right now.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Radical solutions require to be taken.

There will will be no time for genteel, correct debate when your aircraft explodes into a fireball, accompanied by background yells of insh'allah.

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 10:28

This "global terror" threat is a great exaggeration of reality. It is being peddled by the chiefs of Western society to keep Western society at the front of world dominance. It is for you and in a **** kind of way, I too. The chiefs have to get their dirty hands on the last drops of that precious resource before it's too late. As Dick Cheney once said, "The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratic regimes friendly to the United States."

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 10:29

Latest 'informed rumours' are that it was anticipated that two separate liquids (probably carried in soft-drink bottles), which, when mixed would become volatile. Nitric acid -> nitro-glycerine.

As screening staff haven't been able to receive specific instruction, ALL fluids have been proscribed.

The AvgasDinosaur

10th Aug 2006, 10:32

'Baby milk' has to be sampled before being allowed on board. :E
What even on draught !!!:D :ok: Captains privilege I suppose.
What I don't follow is if they ( Police MI5 MI6 et al) have surprised the terrorists before they can carry out the attrocity, why all this stable door shutting now, or are they not certain they have got them all.
No doubt the lawyers will make money out of this:mad: Suing for wrongful arrest, missed flights lost luggage cancelled holidays missed business etc etc.
I feel soryy for the ops staff trying to put the wheel back on afterwards and the front desk check in staff who given the normal relaxed manner of SLF at check in will be taking a fearful earbashing over this.
Good luck to you all you deserve a round of applause
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D (Smileys are rationed to 15)
Can't do it round so a line will have to suffice
Be lucky
David

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 10:35

Well then everybody might as well go home . . .

AVSEC

10th Aug 2006, 10:37

laptops are being checked in.This was bound to happen.Have you been following programmes like dispatch on channel 4 in the uk,and sharia tv on channel 148 on cable?
This is going to be going on for some time,and I personally cannot understand the anger of the perpetrators despite the great lives they leive in the UK.
Just crazy.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 10:47

CockpitThruster

10th Aug 2006, 10:49

Firstly, well done to the security services for stopping this in its tracks - it's a pretty tough call to make, and you'll probably get flamed which ever way this turned out.

As for the tough security measures in place, I can understand why the pax are being screened so much but the flight crew?

Surely if the flight crew wanted to bring down an aircraft they wouldn't do it with a bottle of medicine, laptop or ham sandwich?

If a pilot has enough security clearance to fly the plane why slap all these other restrictions on them?

deathcruzer

10th Aug 2006, 10:52

Superpilot ….There are casualties on both sides the inevitable result that occurs when people stop talking to each other and start shooting. My problem here is that if steps are not taken by the authorities to isolate this problem then citizens will feel that they have to get involved. That is the last thing we want….

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 10:55

And then Old Enoch will laugh heartily from his grave.

There is nothing in the world we can offer these people as a solution, except the actual world itself.

I for one will never accept the chains and shackles of a recently invented religion. No civilised being would.

ExSimGuy

10th Aug 2006, 10:56

Pax Speaking - You mean that the guys (gals) up-front now have to eat the often awful stuff that many airlines offer as "in-flight meals" :eek:

Of course, the major players will be feeding the crew with First-Class scoff, which is usually excellent. But Danny and his colleagues will be suffering one-class food.:yuk:

As for the Loco pilots - You are probably better off than the second group (above) as at least getting no food means that you will be immune to the risk of food poisoning :E

Danny - Hope you managed to get home without too much hassle - and back to "the office" for the next duty. Same goes for all the other crews effected. Best hopes for all involved.

Sunfish

10th Aug 2006, 11:01

Spare a thought about the poor bloody Lebanese. I hope the confusion continues until the travelling UK public gets a taste of what life in Beirut must be like. Then maybe they will do something about this war.

RoyHudd

10th Aug 2006, 11:06

Sunfish....SHUT UP.

Please remove his non-aviation related nonsense opinion, and this too, by all means.

brain fade

10th Aug 2006, 11:08

What goes around, comes around

Joe le Taxi

10th Aug 2006, 11:09

Moderators, please delete Sunfish's post - This is neither the time nor the place for unbalanced personal politial rhetoric.

The Mixmaster

10th Aug 2006, 11:09

Met Police several times in their press conference, communicated to community leaders.. community leaders.

WTF,

Surely with integration there is no community leader... after all, if it is a white British person they don't go and tell the priest do they ?

Serious comment btw. I understand that many "ethnic groups" are also unhappy with these so called and unelected "leaders".

If you're being serious, this is complete toss. Not only are you assuming that every British white person is a Christian, but also you cannot draw a comparison between the Muslim community and their Imams and the "White British" community and priests.

I for one salute the good work of The Met. Ok they've messed up in the past and I for one will not claim they are whiter than white but they appear to have efficiently stopped a significant threat to the UK the US and the aviation industry as a whole.

What bugs me are these so called chaotic scenes at airports due to long waits and no hand luggage. Would these people rather end up in pieces across the Atlantic?:rolleyes:

Jordan D

10th Aug 2006, 11:15

Take the rhetoric and similar comments to Jet Blast. This thread should be kept clear for information pertaining directly to details directly surrounding todays events. (Sorry if I am treading on any Mods toes).

Jordan

haughtney1

10th Aug 2006, 11:15

Superpilot, whilst I have some sympathy with your position, I would ask you, what would you expect the authorities to do?
Perhaps you feel its easy to sit from the sidelines and pick holes in a fashion that seems to be both ill-informed..or at worst cynical and reactionary.

Whether you agree or disagree with the current government foreign policy, you cant surely be suggesting that innocent lives should be lost to "even up the balance sheet"
My personal position is one of frustration and pity with regards to Lebanon and Iraq, I dont however take the view that the authorities are doing anything more than their job..and that is protecting the public:ok:

RoyHudd

10th Aug 2006, 11:16

Quite. Why should an Australian non-pilot even be on this web-site? Delete ruthlessly please, this too by all means.

watergate

10th Aug 2006, 11:28

This guy posting on the BBC web-site found the solution - or maybe not :ugh:

"Most air travel is unnecessary, holidays can be taken in the country of origin and many business meetings could be held by video conferencing. We should consider a permit to fly similar to the permit to travel required during the second world war. If passenger numbers were substantially reduced then a much higher level of security inspections would be practicable. Terrorists would have the double deterrent of obtaining a permit and passing tightened security."

touch&go

10th Aug 2006, 11:29

Joe le Taxi,

We live in a country of free speech, we can voice our views some we may like and some we may not, but we should not stop free speech and on today of all days, you should read the Daily Mail and what they write is far, far worse that has been said here.

wallsend

10th Aug 2006, 11:31

Sadly, we live in a nasty complicated world these days.

Indeed, indeed. I'm off for a cup of tea and eat the tin of beans that I WAS allowed through security! ;)

Davaar

10th Aug 2006, 11:44

..................it shows the level of disruption that a perceived threat can cause to our 'advanced' society! :hmm:

Yes, but what is the difference between a perceived threat and a threat, and what does it matter?

green granite

10th Aug 2006, 11:45

Wouln't need to expand any airports then :hmm: most airports could cope with the 2 or 3 flights a day. In fact you could probably shut Gatwick & Standstead totally

green granite

10th Aug 2006, 11:46

Most air travel is unnecessary, holidays can be taken in the country of origin and many business meetings could be held by video conferencing. We should consider a permit to fly similar to the permit to travel required during the second world war. If passenger numbers were substantially reduced then a much higher level of security inspections would be practicable. Terrorists would have the double deterrent of obtaining a permit and passing tightened security."

Wouln't need to expand any airports then :hmm: most airports could cope with the 2 or 3 flights a day. In fact you could probably shut Gatwick & Standstead totally

BenThere

10th Aug 2006, 11:53

This incident is only an episode, which will soon be reduced to a footnote in the history of this very long and comprehensive war.

One day, this tiny, infitessimal, insignificant, miniscule minority of extremist murderers will succeed on a scale that compels a serious and realistic response.

When we on the side of civilization no longer have to fight each other as much as the enemy of civilization, and recognize collectively that the status quo is no longer survivable, then truly appropriate action will be taken, and the war will be won and all this terror and killing will be an ugly memory.

I think this could happen in weeks, years, or decades, but it will happen, of that I am quite certain. I hope it does before Iran achieves nuclear missile capability, or Pakistan's arsenal falls into their hands. So far, we haven't done our next generation any favors by failing to respond forcefully to the threat.

The world has seen this movie before, but somewhere along the way has lost the plot.

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 11:54

Well, terrorism seems pretty easy to me. Even if you fail, you cause such massive disruption and get endless media attention.
:mad: :mad:

tony draper

10th Aug 2006, 11:55

Hmmm, just thinking, peeps are having to dump bottles of plonk cans of pop books toys I pods ect in the airport, what happens to all that stuff they have to leave behind?
:confused:

BenThere

10th Aug 2006, 11:58

tony draper

10th Aug 2006, 12:01

Hmmm, just thinking, peeps are having to dump bottles of plonk cans of pop books toys I pods ect in the airport, what happens to all that stuff they have to leave behind?
:confused:

phnuff

10th Aug 2006, 12:04

Hmmm, just thinking, peeps are having to dump bottles of plonk cans of pop books toys I pods ect in the airport, what happens to all that stuff they have to leave behind?

www.ebay.co.uk :ok: :}

Davaar

10th Aug 2006, 12:07

This incident is only an episode, which will soon be reduced to a footnote in the history of this very long and comprehensive war.

When we on the side of civilization no longer have to fight each other as much as the enemy of civilization, and recognize collectively that the status quo is no longer survivable, then truly appropriate action will be taken, and the war will be won

.......this could happen in weeks, years, or decades, but it will happen, of that I am quite certain.

The world has seen this movie before, but somewhere along the way has lost the plot.

Yes. We saw it in 732 AD, and in the late 16th century, and at points in between, and points after.

sugden

10th Aug 2006, 12:08

Stop being so soppy.
We all know about the rights and wrongs relating to Bush's "Great War on Terrorism" Many of us are disgusted about what is taking place in Lebanon.
In times of serious crisis it is wise the think globally but act locally and that is how I feel right now

El Grifo, there's a key word in your post which is not being done. "Think".

The response today is out of proportion to the threat.

The terrorists win.

A more balanced approach is required rather than knee jerk reactions.

Either this is sustained in perpetuity, in which case there will be mass redundancies in the aviation business, or we find a way of improving security without so much disruption.

Today of all days, with a number of people arrested, there is not going to be a bomb attack from these shores. That gives the authorities at least 24 hours to decide what to do. Armed police, huge queues, breathless news reporting, it removes perspective on risks and solutions.

A bit more thought, some more considered action, and we might start making progress. Globally as well as locally.

Wiley

10th Aug 2006, 12:11

Isn't it amazig how the "Zionist war of aggression" in Lebanon has disappeared from our TV screens?

Stand by for some Islamic spokesman or website to announce that this current business in London is all a Zionist plot to move public attention from Lebanon.

N380UA

10th Aug 2006, 12:13

Ramsi Jussuf had planned a very similar plot in 1995. With liquid explosives he wanted to blow up 11 flights between the US and Asia. He used a nitroglycerin base in a contact lenses solution bottle and digital watch as timer for a "test run" on a Philippine Airlines flight on 11.12.94. Ramsi Jussuf was arrested 1995 but his plan and the "instruction" on how to orchestre such event was widely distributed and publicized. Today's event reflect almost every detail of this plan.

Spiegel Online (German) (http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,431024,00.html)

lexxity

10th Aug 2006, 12:18

"Most air travel is unnecessary, holidays can be taken in the country of origin and many business meetings could be held by video conferencing. We should consider a permit to fly similar to the permit to travel required during the second world war. If passenger numbers were substantially reduced then a much higher level of security inspections would be practicable. Terrorists would have the double deterrent of obtaining a permit and passing tightened security."

What a stupid attitude to have, lets all stay in our own little kingdoms and never venture out and see and meet some amazing places and people. No thanks, I fully intend to keep travelling and seeing this great world of ours.

sugden

10th Aug 2006, 12:20

ExSimGuy, ID cards get forged. That's not a substitute for a security check which is fit for purpose.

Security check does not, however, mean lock-down.

Today we have a pointless lockdown.

BenThere

10th Aug 2006, 12:23

This incident is only an episode, which will soon be reduced to a footnote in the history of this very long and comprehensive war.

One day, this so-called tiny, infinitessimal, insignificant, miniscule minority of extremist murderers will succeed on a scale that compels a serious and realistic response.

When we on the side of civilization no longer have to fight each other as much as the enemy of civilization, and recognize collectively that the status quo is no longer survivable, then truly appropriate action will be taken, and the war will be won and all this terror and killing will be an ugly memory.

I think this could happen in weeks, years, or decades, but it will happen, of that I am quite certain. I hope it does before Iran achieves nuclear missile capability, or Pakistan's arsenal falls into their hands. So far, we haven't done our next generation any favors by failing to respond forcefully to the threat.

Ultimately, I think the war will be won. Jihad, almost by definition, has no technoligical or industrial base, its economic lifeblood almost wholly in the form of petrodollars. People living under its tyrannical credo are soon miserable and seek change. Semi-literate mullahs preaching hatred with smug certainty to an audience of young, hopeless post adolescent males have not had to provide answers for the misery they engender. In the long run, the movement is self-destructive. The enemy they seek to destroy operates under a philosophy of self-restraint, easily able at any time to end the conflict using existing weapons at its disposal.

The world has seen this movie before, but somewhere along the way has lost the plot.

Edited to add: Sorry, I triple posted this during the server jam-up. I deleted the other iterations.

Lon More

10th Aug 2006, 12:31

Lexxity, yes and no. I would miss the freedom to do what I want, however we are fighting a war, although not everybody sees it that way. BenThere has probably hit the nail on the head. things will only get worse before they get better.
sugden pointless lockdown? I don't think so. Which do you prefer, inconvenience or possible death of thousands? The security infrastructure does not exist anywhere to process the numbers passing through, e.g. Heathrow, at this time of the year

spekesoftly

10th Aug 2006, 12:49

Jacko etc, just in case you missed it earlier:-

I have just flown into LHR before the total shut down. Eeerie. Luckily got my bags but have no idea how I'm going to get up to MAN. Hitch hiking sounds like a plausible possibility.

Chaos reigns. However, please limit this thread to issues directly affecting aircrew. This is not the place to discuss what pax have to put up with. I have moved all the posts that are off topic as far as I'm converned to the Jet Blast forum where you can digress as much as you like.

This forum is for aircrew and issues that affect them. If you feel the urge to do spotterish things or discuss pax woes, use the appropriate forum as otherwise, it is a shame to have your work removed.

Jackonicko

10th Aug 2006, 13:04

Speke softly,

What affects passengers enough to turn them away from air travel will DIRECTLY affect aircrew.

When security precautions appear disproportionate and ill-thought to PPL-holding aviation journalists, and when they threaten to cause people like me to seek alternative ways of travelling, there is a real problem, and to say so isn't 'spotterish', nor are these specifically 'pax woes'.

We're both pilots, chum, and we both earn our livings from aviation. I'm an amateur pilot and professional communicator, so I'm a guest here, while you're a professional pilot (one assumes) and an amateur communicator.

I'd welcome all and any advice on flying from a professional flier, but as a professional communicator, I'd gently suggest that a little less arrogance might be appropriate.

bacardi walla

10th Aug 2006, 13:13

So when I check in my hand luggage into the hold of the Ryanair flight, will I be charged another £2.50 ???? I'm all for security, and it appears that Ryanair are publishing updates at regular intervals, but no mention of additional costs when placing hand baggage into the hold. Anyone have the answer ??

ShotOne

10th Aug 2006, 13:22

I suspect if there is any way of getting more cash from you, O'leary will do so.

At least they ARE giving updates. I have a mate flying Lufthansa into UK. Website shows flight on time even though they have announced on national news that all their London flights are cancelled

potkettleblack

10th Aug 2006, 13:22

So will I ever see my laptop/PDA and various other high value items again when they get checked into the hold? It is already nigh on impossible to insure these items when travelling/in cars etc.

Outlook

10th Aug 2006, 13:25

Jacko et al

Whilst you do raise some valid questions, I understand the priority to to leave this thread clear to permit air crew to communicate and seek assistance with their jobs.

Questions about kids toys etc are probably better asked within the spotters corner or JB for a more suitable audience to answer.

spekesoftly

10th Aug 2006, 13:28

Jacko,

You're over-reacting, massively. No arrogance intended, whatsoever. It simply appeared to me that you might not have seen Danny's earlier post - I was trying to be helpful. I sincerely hope that, on this occasion, my communications skills are sufficently professional.

Jordan D

10th Aug 2006, 13:31

Regarding the snidey posts over Ryanair, they like FlyBe have said that they are suspending baggage rulings/charges at this current time.

Ryanair & EasyJet have both said they like BA are waiving costs for flight changes.

Jordan

Taildragger67

10th Aug 2006, 13:36

Heard on Radio 4 this morning (about 08.20 or so) that FR was not charging for hold baggage today.

malc4d

10th Aug 2006, 13:40

anyone know if nordic nrd 3510 left for arrecife ? ?
ta

rugmuncher

10th Aug 2006, 13:40

Any body heard from "WELLARD" recently,,, last week he started a bit of a commotion over a thread about a friend of his who wasn't allowed a bottle of water through security.

I wonder if he is so adament to take whatever he likes through!

:confused:

bacardi walla

10th Aug 2006, 13:40

Thanks for the replies regarding baggage costs. Personally, I'm not bothered if an airline charges me for hold luggage, but there are some people who will kick off and at a time when tempers are high anyway, extra frustration and anger of baggage costs is NOT what airport/airline staff want.

tilewood

10th Aug 2006, 13:45

Yes, but what is the difference between a perceived threat and a threat, and what does it matter?

I don't know, you are the one obviously bothered enough to write about it! :p

DuncanF

10th Aug 2006, 13:55

Not to make light of the current situation, but there is an upside to this ... no more hanging around whilst boarding whilst some muppet tries to heave a suitcase bigger than them into the overhead bins! ;)

Actually it could catch on. Wasn't it Ryanair who is trying to persuade people to move from hold to cabin baggage by charging for the former. Hmmm ...

Duncan

Genghis the Engineer

10th Aug 2006, 14:00

I know flybe have waived all extra baggage costs, not sure on the other locos tho.
Just watching the BBC news 24 coverage, where on earth do they find these "experts" ???
I have a degree in aerospace engineering, and the stuff they are saying is SO far off the truth it's quite scary!
Which bits? (not disagreeing with you, I teach on those degrees, just curious).

G

MichaelJP59

10th Aug 2006, 14:05

Not to make light of the current situation, but there is an upside to this ... no more hanging around whilst boarding whilst some muppet tries to heave a suitcase bigger than them into the overhead bins! ;)

I wouldn't mind that, but why ban books and magazines? I reckon 8 hours of staring at the in-flight-entertainment will drive me bonkers!

Capt.KAOS

10th Aug 2006, 14:14

This reminds me of Operation Bojinka. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bojinka)

Now this is interesting:

"The two had already converted fourteen bottles of contact lens solution into bottles containing nitroglycerin, which was readily available in the Philippines. Yousef taped a metal rod to the arch of his of foot in place of the detonators. Yousef and Mohammed wore jewelry and clothing with metal to confuse airport security. They packed condoms in their bags to support their story that they were meeting women"

Lon More

10th Aug 2006, 14:18

why ban books and magazines?
IIRC it is possible to soak the paper in certain chemicals whichcould be exploded, or have I been watching too many old episodes of the A team?

brain fade

10th Aug 2006, 14:18

Sooner or later........what goes round will come round.

I hope it happens on my day off!

er340790

10th Aug 2006, 14:37

So it's Open Season for thefts from checked baggage by all those sticky-fingered baggage handlers (YES YOU ARE!) as well as huge spondoolies from excess baggage charges for the airlines plus massive sales of on-board bottled water at $4.95 now you can't take your own on board.

Cynical? Moi?

Mr Lexx

10th Aug 2006, 14:44

I can understand it can be a problem however I cant see the business chappies among the world travelling by sea.....

What a fine idea, LEXXITY, sod BMI to the states in October for my conference, let's go QM2!

Mr Lexx

10th Aug 2006, 14:59

A very valid point has been raised elsewhere. As the chaps from Natwest found out, performing a crime against a US company results in you getting deported to face trial in the States. As all the airlines supposed to have been targeted were of a US nature, does this mean that the perpetrators of the plan will soon find themselves sunbathing and wearing orange in Cuba?

One hopes so

DistantRumble

10th Aug 2006, 15:04

Don't most travel insurance policies disclaim liability against delay or loss caused by terrorism ?

Spinflight

10th Aug 2006, 15:08

If someone is going to blow up a plane then you won't catch them with the security measures at the airport, no matter how stringent they are. At the end of the day the security measures are well known and therefore any serious plot would take them into account.

Any large scale terrorist activity is only going to be stopped by intel.

G-AWZK

10th Aug 2006, 15:25

As the chaps from Natwest found out, performing a crime against a US company results in you getting deported to face trial in the States.

Except they did not perform any crime against any US company. They are being tried for wire fraud. If any company has a claim against them it is Greenwich Natwest (now owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland).

green granite

10th Aug 2006, 15:25

persumeably had it not been foiled this would have been the "answer to the USA" on the 22nd of the month, that was promised by Iran

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 15:26

OK OK, nuff "hand wringin" already.

Lighten up a little. Get a coffee and check this out :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8fEHplkLaY

:mad:

airship

10th Aug 2006, 15:36

Whilst everyone about the place appears to be losing their heads, one couldn't help but notice that our Jordan D has been attempting to keep order in the R&N thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2768873&postcount=26): Without wanting to see this thread become anything more than an information poing, can we keep the arguments over security elsewhere? Maybe Jet Blast.

BBC News reports: Lufthansa cancels all flights to LHR, Brussels to LHR/LGW flights all cancelled. News conference from BAA in next 30 minutes.

Regarding comment above detailing Lo-Co: Easyjet (according to website) are allowing penalty free changes.

Also for info: BA/Easyjet/Ryanair share prices down

Jordan :rolleyes: ;)

The AvgasDinosaur

10th Aug 2006, 15:38

airship

10th Aug 2006, 15:55

We're all quite sure that there really was an imminent threat this time around are we? That this latest security alert isn't just another along the lines of "Sadaam's 45 minutes" WMD warning?

D'you reckon if our intelligence guys had waited another 24 hours before intervening, we might instead be reading about the dozen or so airliners which disappeared mysteriously over the Atlantic? Or else, if the bad guys had merely advanced their plans by a day, we'd be looking at the same headlines?

That it's got nothing at all to do with how low in the opinion polls certain leaders might have fallen. And that the electorate no longer believe that they're capable of correctly handling the issues surrounding terrorism?

Please don't all of you get hot under the collar for my posing the question...I'm just a (very poor) piano player... :(

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 15:59

Funny you should bring that up ya big balloon :p I have had lots of PM's suggesting just exactly that.

Hardly surprising after the great WMD deception

airship

10th Aug 2006, 16:13

Did anyone notice any groups of individuals on the tops of tall buildings in their vicinity with unusually glum expressions on their faces today...?! :}

frostbite

10th Aug 2006, 17:15

All the jobsworth types at airports must be in their seventh heaven today!

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 17:21

Was thinking that earlier!

What do ATC do when hardly any flights are operated or most are grounded?
Sit back with a cuppa and read the papers?! :hmm: *

* i don't mean ATC are jobsworths:p

A330ismylittlebaby

10th Aug 2006, 17:24

It's the threat of terror that works for terrorism. What has been achieved today has been damaging to Public confidence in air travel as a safe form of transport. Massive flight delays, feeling of uncertainty, worry about the prospect of bombs, renewed fear about air travel, etc. This could have a long term impact on air travel business. So, the psychology is almost as effective, without any loss of life. That's where the Government and the Security Services are caught between a rock and a hard place - don't react and people could die, react and there may be lives saved. Tough call. For the terrorists, they've achieved their objective already of causing dissruption, so no need need to take further risks. This does assume an element of cool, calm, rational, logic though :-(

If we keep the security at this high level then i am not worried about flying, i do hope they keep the high security level to the extent that they need to keep us safe.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 17:25

Chaos at UK Airports, Massive flight delays and many cancellations, Air transport system brought to its knees. Security condition CRITICAL.

So how come my mother-in-law arrived in ACE on LTE 943 form EDI 15 mins early.

Checked around the apron for any signs of a broomstick, but seeing that she was carrying a wee transparent bag of medicine and spectacles etc, I guess she arrived by conventional means. (she is 81) :ok:

Mercenary Pilot

10th Aug 2006, 17:26

B.A. Has made a statement.......

http://www.cult-clothes.com/ebay/BA/BA%20Small.jpg

FOOL!!!

:ok:

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 17:27

NO mobie.
NO iPod.
NO Sun.
NO bottle of water.
NO trashie novel.
NO camera.
NO laptop.

HOW did airline passengers remain sane before the onset of the above 'essentials'?

POT NOODLE HORN

10th Aug 2006, 17:34

Mr Mercenary

Do you really think that is funny !!!!!!

HORN:eek:

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 17:34

UK radio interview with a guy who was ON A 'PLANE (in the air) on 9/11, and now finds himself about to fly again TODAY. He had a LUCKY escape on 9/11, and hopes that he will be lucky again . . .

AFAIK, none of the suspects where intending to fly today, and they were all intending to chose American providers. Close! Will it be third time (un)lucky for him?

How many flights are there per day?

sir

10th Aug 2006, 17:37

sheikhs ! on a motherlovin' plane !

ExSimGuy

10th Aug 2006, 17:38

They invented Trashy Novels before they invented airoplanes (it was a requirement in the aircraft development process :E )

Davaar

10th Aug 2006, 17:39

I don't know, you are the one obviously bothered enough to write about it! :p

How soon you forget, tilewood.

The "perceived threat" came from you at 07:24 today.

The neat distinction is your own, and I thought you might have known what you had in mind by it. Evidently not.

ATNotts

10th Aug 2006, 18:03

I read throught the first 4 or 5 pages but couldnit see anything on this.

I am old enough to remember, following, I believe, the downing of an AI 747 off Ireland, that the powers that be banned all electricals from aircraft holds, because of the risk of an explosive device, triggered by electronics, being placed on board, and detonated electronically.

Surely now, "Bin-Bombing" and his disciples will simply try the old trick of killing inocents without the requirement of losing a foot-soldier?

Has HMG, MI5 and the rest shot themselves in the foot on this one?

FlyingConsultant

10th Aug 2006, 18:06

Mobile phones were used to detonate the Madrid train bombs (ten of them), and anything could be hidden in a soft toy (although likely to show on scanning monitors).

Missed that. So they were used.
agree on the toy

FlyingConsultant

10th Aug 2006, 18:07

That would be sensible, except that that 'secure' water is also banned.
At KSEA this morning the airside stores had pulled all beverages off the shelves. Nobody (yet) seems to have thought about the vending machines though :hmm:

Classic.:ugh:

A330ismylittlebaby

10th Aug 2006, 18:10

Classic.:ugh:
Don't think anyone will buy a vending machine bottle at the prices they charge

Shamrock274

10th Aug 2006, 18:14

The only question i have is why is our Prime Minister still on Holiday when the coutry is still on critical level of alert (highest possible)...

Heard Tony on PM on radio 4 congratulating the police while He was in the carribean.
:confused::confused:

reverserunlocked

10th Aug 2006, 18:32

Just returned from Cologne into Liverpool. No fuss, apart from much more thorough security searches and the 'no hand luggage' sermon at check in meaning we had to buy another bag to fit the wife's assorted clobber in.

Passports and boarding cards in hand only, we get to the gate....half the pax getting aboard have handbags/rucksacks/carrier bags/duty free....:ugh:

Bucket

10th Aug 2006, 18:46

:confused:

IB4138 - you raise a valid point. I was under the impression that 7kg was about the weight limit for carry on luggage together with strict dimension requirements.

But in the States last week I saw a 20 kg allowance for hand luggage.

What gives????

The Otter's Pocket

10th Aug 2006, 18:49

Why take beverages off the shelves?

Is this plan so well thought out that the "cell" has a mole at WH Smiths that has put a quantity of PE4 Explosive in a coke can on the 3rd shelf 4th from the rear of the left hand fridge (next to the Quantro) in Terminal 1 at Standstead, you know the little one near the toilets and gate 17 or so.

And somehow BAA make a profit employing these morons to make this decision. Somebody please get me a job there, I could probably come up with that one on a three day week.:ugh:

VFE

10th Aug 2006, 18:51

Last time my mother went on holiday, she was singled out for enhanced security screening. 62 years old, white, wife of retired police officer, mother of BA pilot. Obviously easy to mistake her for an Al Qaeda terrorist then..... :rolleyes:
I flew to the US not long after Mr.Shoe Bomber so they were doing those shoe searches as we boarded our A/C. I happened to make eye contact with one of the security girls and so gestured that I was willing for her to search me and she willingly took me up on my offer (quiet at the back there!). One assumes she was obviously feeling uncomfortable at the prospect of pulling aside someone less willing than I and so accepted my offer with open arms....

Now what does that tell you about the whole security process and it's aim?

I'll tell ya what - it's a bit of a charade, that's what.

VFE.

NB: I'm British, white, and at the time was in my mid-twenties so working on the same premise as Human Factor hardly look like a member of Al-Q..... whatever they look like?! My guess is they don't have a tattoo celebrating membership.

Big Kahuna Burger

10th Aug 2006, 18:55

Last time my mother went on holiday, she was singled out for enhanced security screening. 62 years old, white, wife of retired police officer, mother of BA pilot. Obviously easy to mistake her for an Al Qaeda terrorist then..... :rolleyes:

Ahhhhhhh. The sweet smell of that PC ness that pervades every corner of British life these days. :ugh:

hetfield

10th Aug 2006, 19:12

Voters will be happy with the PM and his forces....

MarcJF

10th Aug 2006, 19:12

A330

Social profiling, national identity card with biometrics, it's the only way.

AVIONIQUE

10th Aug 2006, 19:12

Of course profiling should be used as a main feature of any rounded ,thought out security policy,but the goverment having incubated such ill feeling among several groups in this country are plain scared to do so.Having a fair and just foreign policy(as promised some years ago) instead of slavish adherence to US policy would do more to secure air transport than banning pilots phones or old ladies spec cases. It will now be even harder to carry out our operations on a day to day level,and more time consuming and awkward for the passengers,yet the fundamentals are left unchecked.It is time nettles were grasped and the goverment had the courage to address world politics,immigration,cost cutting and all the other real reasons for these maladies.
As an aside I was told of a group of baggage handlers at a major uk airport two weeks ago who were in conversation with a collegue.they were waiting for their escort to go airside to work and had been in the country for TWO WEEKS. How does this square with with all the hoops we have to jump through all the time with CRC and employment/residence history etc.One collegue has had her application rejected 5 times for a 2 week gap in work history! I cant help but feel that the basics are being overlooked in all the detail.

spycatcher

10th Aug 2006, 19:18

aye airship. kindo reminded me of the 45min claim and the ricin plot. makes me wonder what they are trying to hide this time. probably just a distraction from them draggin their feet. or maybe the civil war in iraq. god when i think of it, there are so many things...

IB4138

10th Aug 2006, 19:27

Total over reaction from "must be seen to be politically correct " HM Government.

As LTNman has said on Airlines and Airports Luton Thread......

Don’t know why when everyone that has been picked up by the police is English but of Pakistan origin. This clampdown on all passengers is so that a few Muslims don’t get the ar*ehole that they are being discriminated against.

Being a Muslim is not a dirty word and we all know that most of them are good people but if some of them are intent on mass murder then they should not complain if there is selective targeting with limited resources.

and Minnie the Moocher

No prizes for guessing what sort of passengers should be checked more carefully at Luton but no doubt mum and dad with their two children travelling on holiday to Spain will be given thorough check for political correctness".

It may also encourage Muslims to identify at an early stage, these miscreants in their communities to the authorities and close down gatherings in their mosques that are terrorist inclined.

If not; and I do not in any way condone what Israel has done to the Lebanon and it's people; mosques in the UK, that these people have been members of, should be closed down and even demolished.

Then, other Muslims, deprived of their places of worship, may identify these terrorists in their midst, instead of sheltering them and turning a blind eye to their activities.

It is time some Muslims grew up, supported the Country of their birth and embraised the 21st century.

BenThere

10th Aug 2006, 19:40

The Real Slim Shady,

Maybe because he fits the profile. Duh.:( :ugh:

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 19:46

I've taken everything onboard IB, and agree - just strikes me that many people will think you and I and others are of the racist species.

Islamophobia (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5251346.stm)

Islamic Human Rights Commission chairman Massoud Shadjareh said: "It has been clear for a very long time that there is an institutional Islamophobia in the implementation of stop-and-search.

"It has almost become a licence for people to implement Islamophobic and racist tendencies."

Hmm

MReyn24050

10th Aug 2006, 19:52

Yes. As mentioned numerous times above, the crew/staff security is just as stringent as that for pax at the moment.

Thank you for that. I appreciate it is a very difficult time for all involved in keeping the aircraft and airports operational. My thoughts and respect is with all those involved.

The Real Slim Shady

10th Aug 2006, 20:12

Maybe because he fits the profile. Duh.

Whose profile?

Wasn't the Oklahoma bomber white American?

Jackonicko

10th Aug 2006, 20:12

"Each time the terrorists try a tactic, the specific tactic is blocked by security procedures post hoc. So the terrorists try a new tactic. We then block that.

We had hijackers with pistols, we introduced metal detectors. Then there were hold luggage bombs, so we started screening hold luggage one way and another. Then the hijackers used little knives, so we confiscated nail-clippers. Next we had the shoe-bomber, so now we all have to have our shoes inspected.

And the latest is liquid explosive in bottles, so we ban bottles of water.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm dreading the eventuality of the underwear bomber.'

It's the foreskin bomber who worries me......

frostbite

10th Aug 2006, 20:14

I'm quite happily and unashamedly racist in some respects.

Don't care if it's fashionable or not.

teeteringhead

10th Aug 2006, 20:21

It's the foreskin bomber who worries me......
Well he won't be a Muslim, will he Jacko! ;)

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 20:23

(though my beard is usually a lot tidier than his!)

Well. If that's yer beard in the avatar, i'm not sure about that:p ;)

Vizzo

10th Aug 2006, 20:27

The Real Slim Shady

10th Aug 2006, 20:28

I have a beard, and because I work outside a lot in a sunny climate, my skin is usually quite dark.

That isn't profiling; just racism.

SXB

10th Aug 2006, 20:30

Colmac
The thing about targeting muslims in the security line, I'm sure, already happens. As for "stop and search" I'm not so sure (assuming you're referring to the police) as this is monitored.

One thing that I do find disturbing is that when the media wheel out a so called "muslim community leader" the first words out of their mouths are not "we condemn such cowardly and wicked acts unconditionally" but more like "we must be sensitive to the feelings of young muslims in the community and the security forces must not inflame the situation anymore than they have already done"

The reaction of most muslims is "who the f*ck is that guy ?" The people wheeled out by the media are not representative of the community and neither are they muslim "leaders" none of them are elected and a lot of muslims bristle with anger when they hear their comments.

There are other figures in the muslim community who are representative but the problem is that the media never interview them because they much prefer to have someone say something controversial...

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 20:32

I was born in Scotland, I live in Spain, and I holiday in Jamaica. I travel all over the world with my work. I never feel alien anywhere that I travel. I almost feel like a chameleon, I just adapt to suit the circumstances. I love the flavour and colours of other cultures.

I will never, and have made it eminently clear to my clients, that I will never travel to a Muslim country. As far as I am concerned, they can get on with their lives without any input from me. I will not help to promote tourism in their countries.

I am racist when it comes to that particular religious group. I could rant on for ever, but the least said the better.

Suffice to say that in my opinion, the greatest danger to civilisation today comes from beneath the Black Cloud of Islam.

The Real Slim Shady

10th Aug 2006, 20:36

Suffice to say that in my opinion, the greatest danger to civilisation today comes from beneath the Black Cloud of Islam.

And of course if you happen to be living in Lebanon the Black Cloud of Judaism might be your greatest danger.

Your opinion is, in my opinion, myopic.

Flying Lawyer

10th Aug 2006, 20:39

Bush says plot a 'stark reminder' that the US is still at war with Islamic extremists. "The American people need to know we live in a dangerous world, but our government will do everything we can to protect our people from those dangers."

Blair says "There has been an enormous amount of co-operation with the US authorities which has been of great value and underlines the threat we face and our determination to counter it."

'Tis an ill wind that blows nobody any good. ;)

Aloon

10th Aug 2006, 20:45

Quote:
I have a beard, and because I work outside a lot in a sunny climate, my skin is usually quite dark.

That isn't profiling; just racism.

Define both?????? Where is the line drawn???? Who draws it??? Where does the major threat come from??? Why does racism come into it??????

Are you a security officer who has to make these decisions??????

Please enlighten me with your definition of racism, and good, effective security for the masses?????

Yet, I do ask everyone... Why hightened meaures today and byond, IF...... security is at it's best yet???? Has security since 9/11, and now, been that lax??? What makes security so much more vital today that it didn't every other day since 9/11?? Surely security is a constant measure for deterent rather than intelligance based, when we think it's needed????

Hmmmm????????

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 20:46

SXB.

Your post, to me anyway, makes sense.

I'm wondering whether this discussion, as of the above last few posts, is perhaps better within a new thread.

That way the media-induced can prattle on here.

The Real Slim Shady

10th Aug 2006, 20:54

Y'know the one single thing that strikes me is that this entire problem has been engineered by the creation of the Israeli state post WW2.

I have read comments about fighters and suicide bombers, Islamic, and the one single thing / aspect which strikes me was the wholehearted reluctance of the Jewish to fight back: in WW2 they could have fought. They didn't.

Nevertheless they are regarded as a special case.

Hypothetical question....how would we, the West, have dealt with Jewish suicide bombers in 1941?

SXB

10th Aug 2006, 20:54

I'm wondering whether this discussion, as of the above last few posts, is perhaps better within a new thread.

That way the media-induced can prattle on here.

I think you're right Colmac...

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 20:57

What is possessing you crazy lot into thinking that the Muslim community can help "by not hiding the terrorists". It's bloody well easier said than done!!! Firstly, you assume it is happening for sure and this without an iota of evidence. Secondly you think failure to grass is a deeply Islamic problem and thirdly you assume the clever, sophisticated, meticulous terrorists are stupid enough to broadcast their intentions in the face of modern day surveillance. You contradict yourselves in half a sentence!

cwatters

10th Aug 2006, 20:58

So Al Q or whatever will now start sticking the stuff up their ar$e ! :ugh:

Years ago athletes wishing to avoid drug tests were using catheters to fill their bladders with clean urine from someone else.

G-CPTN

10th Aug 2006, 20:58

Is it not possible (based on statistics) to accept to odds and ignore them, allowing the casualties as collateral damage? What are the relative probabilities of being a victim of these acts of terrorism compared to the likelihood of being slain by a motor vehicle as we go about our business (apparently unconcerned)?

Think of the stress (and confusion) that we could avoid.

rampman

10th Aug 2006, 21:02

i want to know can i take a cow airside so i can get some milk to have my breakfast and have a brew:p

on a more serious note dose anyone know how hard it is to make a liquid bomb i do and it is very very hard you would have to be a chemist to put one together ... and as for taking water and milk of aircrew and staff when they said they would take a sip to show them .... what a joke might as well :ugh:

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 21:03

Hey Slim, possibly worth pointing out, that in my opinion, the second biggest danger to civilisation today are the Israeli Hawks and taking up a close third are the American neocons.

I have a fairly clear view on who the dodgy guys are and there ain't to much seperating second and third places.

The number one spot does go by a neck, to Allah's Army.

:mad:

Superpilot

10th Aug 2006, 21:05

Quiz time: Between 10/09/01 and 06/07/05 how many people died as a result of terrorist activities?

How many died trying to bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan?

...and G-CPTN, it is only by asking questions such as the above that I and many others can see through the crap that is The Establishment.

Chesty Morgan

10th Aug 2006, 21:07

I suppose it depends on your point of view, but aren't they the same thing?

cwatters

10th Aug 2006, 21:10

you would have to be a chemist to put one together ... and as for taking water and milk of aircrew and staff when they said they

Google suggests it isn't hard if you can get the ingredients..

http://uncensored.citadel.org/amoeba-readfile.php?filename=astrolit.txt

vaneyck

10th Aug 2006, 21:10

scameron77

10th Aug 2006, 21:15

Without wanting to sound like a Nazi or a jingoist but you can't help but see yet again that those arrested today all hailed from the same background and belief system as the 7/7 bombers and (I'm guessing at this stage) probably have alegiences to the same forces behind 9/11 and Madrid.

Well aware this is an aviation discussion forum and aware that I may be castigated for swaying this off topic slightly but I feel as pilots and potential pilots, we should maybe debate what should be done to lessen the effects of this affecting us in the future.

Personally I would suggest, presume and suspect that these people ar eof the opinion that they would welcome the establishment of Sharia law within the UK whither it be universal or in an enclave. Following fundamental Islamic beliefs and practices. Yes, there people are in the minority of Muslims, most I have had personal contact with have been both pleasant and respectful, however there are a signifcant number of idealistic youths who want to get their 40 virgins in Heaven.

My solution to this problem is the following and it may be considered draconian in the tree hugging, bean bag sitting, wooly jumper wearing, corners of our society but if anybody British citizen was found guilty or committed suicide for terrorist gain then all members of their extended family currently living in the UK (born here or not) would be repatriated to the country of immigration. The treat of their legacy being the loss of all assets in return for a plane ticket for their parents and siblings would maybe make them think twice.

I suspect some people may ask, what if they are of White Anglo Saxon heritage? So far except for that dick with the shoe bomb everyone associated has been of South Asian and Middle Eastern herritage. However somewhere like the Falklands or some Island off the West coast of Scotland could be provided :)

The problem is integration, establishing schools for a specific religeon breeds misunderstanding and a lack of knowledge of the culture of those other members of society. Believe me I know, I come from a particular part of the UK where religeon (between Christians) cause more arguments, fights and mistrust which is a stain on how we more forward here at home and how we are percieved abroad.

Comments please

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 21:19

That isn't profiling; just racism

Hey Slim, we are not talking about race here we are talking about religious persuasion. Islam is embraced by many races, so find a new bogey word to attack the critics of heavy duty islam.

:mad:

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 21:24

How many died trying to bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan?

Jeeeezus that is such a laugh that it almost makes me cry. Afghanistan maybe, but Iraq never.

Can I just say it as it is (or as it will be) - - - - CIVIL WAR

:mad:

DtyCln

10th Aug 2006, 21:25

A Hampshire Constabulary spokesman said there were no specific threats to any airport in the region, but as a precautionpolice patrols had been increased.

Dorset Police set up vehicle checkpoints on the approach to Bournemouth Airport and stepped up patrols at the ;) Compton Abbas ;) airfield near Shaftesbury in north Dorset.

No hand luggage on the Cessna 152 tomorrow!

stevieed

10th Aug 2006, 21:27

Just heard a NY city official saying he's known of this plot for several months, and thanking the British security services for keeping him in the loop.
Let's see: officials on both sides of the Atlantic have known for months that terrorists in the UK intend to blow up lots of planes. They have a handle on the conspiracy, they believe, and so they take no extra precautions. Fair enough.
But now the UK security services arrest 21 men, including all the major players, as they believe, and circumstances are more dangerous than they were when these 21 terrorists were on the loose? If they are not more dangerous how can they justify the extra "precautions"? If the airlines are safer now that these men have been arrested, how can they justify continuing for the past few months with "business as usual"?
They can not be certain that they've arrested every cell member, even if there was a 1% chance of a bomb still going off then those precautions were justified. Just imagine if a bomber had gotten away and had managed to detonate a bomb on board :(

Can I just say that I don't work for the airline industry, I'm just a pax, however I believe that the airlines have handled this very well and I just hope the airport staff didn't have to deal with too many irate people!

Flying Lawyer

10th Aug 2006, 21:31

Scameron77

Comments please?

Comment:
Dismissing those who may not agree with your proposal as "tree hugging, bean bag sitting, wooly jumper wearing, corners of our society" isn't conducive to sensible debate.

FL

OneWorld22

10th Aug 2006, 21:37

Today has been nice and convenient for Bush and Blair!

they must be very pleased!

RatherBeFlying

10th Aug 2006, 21:39

According to the web article, hydrazine is a key ingredient.

Hydrazine is nasty stuff that would be a serious hazard to any home chemist.

Any vendor is rightly careful about who can buy it.

colmac747

10th Aug 2006, 21:43

or some Island off the West coast of Scotland could be provided

No way:mad: ...keep your filthy hands off Rockall:{

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 21:48

In my past life I was always warned about approaching a downed F16 for example, from the downwind side, due to the risk of Hidrazine contamination.

The chemical was apparently used in the self start system or similar.

I was advise thet one part in a thousand, contacting with the skin coud be "very harmful"

Flawed memory or complete delusion ???

NWT

10th Aug 2006, 21:49

I guess the car boot sales will be busy in the next few weeks,....numerous laptops, mps, cameras etc that just happen to fall out of luggage that was checked in....by the ammount of bags that regularly fall of badly loaded luggage trolleys at the airports and then get run over by the following lorries I guess the insurance companies will be getting a lot of claims...but then they will say you should not have put anyting valuble in the suitcase....so they wont pay out either....

Capt.KAOS

10th Aug 2006, 21:53

Today has been nice and convenient for Bush and Blair!

they must be very pleased!Can't see why. This shows clearly that their War on Terror is a dangerous mistake. Too provocative and not aimed at the real target. Most of the al-Qaeda main figures are still at large. The real war on terror should be outside the eyes of the world by experts (al-Qaeda loves this current terror hype), case by case on a campaign base.

Now the panic button has been pressed I hope it won't turn out another "ricin" or "Toronto" claim that backfires.

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 21:53

Ahhh St Kilda. . .

Have you ever heard that beautiful haunting song by Dick Gaughan about Ewan Gilles, St Kilda and the Gold.

T'would bring tears tae a gless ee'

:mad:

Ranger One

10th Aug 2006, 21:59

In my past life I was always warned about approaching a downed F16 for example, from the downwind side, due to the risk of Hidrazine contamination.
The chemical was apparently used in the self start system or similar.
I was advise thet one part in a thousand, contacting with the skin coud be "very harmful"
Flawed memory or complete delusion ???

Nothing flawed about yer memory; even a small trace of hydrazine is enough to throw the 'off' switch on your liver. Permanently.

R1

El Grifo

10th Aug 2006, 22:03

Thank goodness for that Ranger !!

Think I will celebrate with another chilled glass of my namesake !!

:mad:

SaturnV

10th Aug 2006, 22:10

According to the web article, hydrazine is a key ingredient.
Hydrazine is nasty stuff that would be a serious hazard to any home chemist.
Any vendor is rightly careful about who can buy it.
There seems to be some confusion over the explosive mixture. Hydrazine would be used to make Astrolite.

Other reports say it was an acetone based explosive, which would be something like MEKP or TATP.

I'm quite sure you couldn't take out your vial of hydrazine on a plane and start mixing away, MEKP would probably incapicitate the mixer before he could finish formulating it on a plane, and TATP is explosive in its white chrystalline solid state.

NG_Kaptain

10th Aug 2006, 22:15

scameron77

10th Aug 2006, 22:18

Maybe not, the tone of that particular statement compared to the rest of the post (except expelling people to the Falklands) is quite different and I assumed, maybe uncorrectly, that those reading it may be able to distinguish.

I'm guessing you don't agree with my proposition. Maybe I should have rephrased as 'more liberal and human rights focused members of our society'? However it could also be argued that its in the same vein as calling a binman a refuse engineering technican.

That is fair enough, however I would be interested in other alternatives to this problem that will act as a deterrent to what ultimately affects our current or future careers as pilots.

An invasion of Wycome by the 3rd Bat. of the Para's is not an option.

stevieed

10th Aug 2006, 22:36

Well said LD Max... Unfortunately the badguys will win this one on the economic front, the punters will stay away and my livelyhood is now in jeopardy. It is idiotic the food, drink and laptop ban and I bet that in two or three weeks,when the hysteria is over these restrictions will be eased.

I'll still fly mate! I'm nervous on takeoff and get a bit worried before flights, but I've had some bad experiences on planes...but you're more likely to have an incident on the way to the airport than on the plane itself! Anyway, no terrorist is stopping me from sunning myself and getting loads of duty free :=

Olof

10th Aug 2006, 22:48

Oh how I wish that everybody would think like that!! :rolleyes:

rotated

10th Aug 2006, 22:56

Assuming it is all true, how is this going to stop the baddies:confused:
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b170/rotated/confpass.jpg
Perhaps Granny is in on the plot, too, or that whale behind her is stuffed with plastique...:rolleyes:
A repeat of the knee-jerk post-911 reaction that apparently accomplished exactly nothing? :hmm:
No, I don't know what else to do but it seems a damn sad day AGAIN for the world...:yuk: :(

LD Max

10th Aug 2006, 23:00

Well the no hand luggage is a fabulous idea - once people get the message security will speed up significantly and not only that loading of planes will be much quicker too - no more waiting while people try to squeeze blatantly oversized bags into the overhead lockers.
LDMAX - the reason for not allowing coke or water is that you would then be delayed even more while every single person with any sort of bottle had to open it and drink some.

Bull :ugh:

vapilot2004

10th Aug 2006, 23:03

Years ago athletes wishing to avoid drug tests were using catheters to fill their bladders with clean urine from someone else.

Yup, Cwatters, whenever we try to control this situation, they will work to undo or end-run around our measures.

We are, most unfortunately stuck with terrorism for a very long time and it will be nearly impossible to completely eliminate. It is a far better tack for our governments to make major foreign policy changes and educate the next generation of Muslim children rather than slowly eroding our freedoms in the name of 'patriotism'. Instead of bombing poor and innocent people, we should endeavour to feed and educate them and look after the weakest of societies' health. The money spent on multi-million dollar weapons and their delivery systems could do wonders for the Western image and safety, if used wisely.

Are we ready for such a sane and humane approach ?

anoxic

10th Aug 2006, 23:23

My friend's name is Mohammed. He is of Pakistani origin, born and raised in Yorkshire and he is Muslim.

Why should he be profiled???

Because he's a Muslim. When was the last time a Baptist blew anyone up?

Ontariotech

10th Aug 2006, 23:25

Well one thing is for sure.....I just saved 15 dollars on my car insurence by switching to Geico.:p

But seriously, I saved 5 dollars on my last fill up at the pump as oil dropped 2.35 US today on the news that exploding baby formula could be used to bring down a 747.:=

Should we thank the terrorist's for thinking of this plot? Or the Bush Blair govenrments for making these loonies do something like this? I am confused:confused:

Flying Lawyer

10th Aug 2006, 23:25

Scameron77

I reacted because I think comments of the 'huggy fluffy liberals' and 'Nazis/Fascists' variety often spoil good debates here, and are almost as bad as the 'I'd round the feckers up and shoot em' (those they dislike, or with whom they disagree) contributions by people who aren't up to sensible discussion but have a curious need to post in 'serious' threads anyway.

Your guess is right. I don't agree with your proposition.
I don't think of myself as liberal or human rights focussed - I think some of the decisions of the ECHR in the name of 'human rights' are completely absurd. However, I think it would be outrageously unfair to punish decent, law-abiding people for crimes committed by members of their family.

Nor do I think it would be a deterrent.
Fanatics/extremists who commit terrible terrorist atrocities against innocent human beings are so driven by their belief in their cause that nothing and no-one matters but the cause - even more so in the case of those who are prepared to sacrifice their own lives in the process.

Other than the obvious measures of intelligence, detection, conviction and life imprisonment (literally) of those who commit or plan terrorist atrocities, one step we might consider is pausing to ask ourselves why Britain is a terrorist target and most countries are not.
We might then restrain our Prime Minister's enthusiasm to join the American administration in meddling so much in the Middle East, interfering in other states' affairs and becoming involved in conflicts between other nations/countries except as our contribution to a UN peace-keeping force.
He'd have to find some other way of feeding his insatiable need to feel important on the world stage but I'm sure we could think of something to help him and, in time, he might come back down to earth and even find his conscience again. Others may disagree, but I think he used to have one.

FL