Norwich and toothpaste [Archive]

IO540

15th Oct 2006, 17:48

Been through Norwich recently. Impressive security, and they confiscate toothpaste, on the way to and from the plane.

I did enquire how the hell is somebody going to fly there on business, in a bizjet or whatever, visiting say a customer with a load of sharp tools or suspicious stuff like electronic components and loads of wires... they have a separate check gate for that sort of stuff, as well as bulky items.

But toothpaste still gets confiscated.

S-Works

15th Oct 2006, 18:00

Had my water confiscated at Newquay today. They were not impressed when I asked if they thought I was going to pour it on the main spar and wait for it to corrode through so the wings fell off. Some people have no sense of humour.

They did leave my toothpaste alone and did not seem at all perturbed about the 14" spike I use to anchor my kite flying lines to the ground that was in my bag.

A and C

15th Oct 2006, 18:23

All you need to do is tell the half-witted idiots that the toothpaste or other items are to be stowed in the baggage hold and cannot be accessed in flight, this works at the better airports in the UK.

It won't work in Manchester they are a bunch of Nazi's without the sence of humor.

Howerver these items should not be taken from the crew of a private flight and I would be inclined to invoice the airport for the things that they have taken in error, you probably won't get the money but it will cost them a fortune in administration dealing with the invoice!

Zulu Alpha

15th Oct 2006, 19:48

I left half a bottle of water in my bag and it was spotted in the Xray and taken out. I said I would drink it there and then rather than throw it away. The security guard said that I couldn't do that and refused to let me have it back even just to drink it.

I questioned this and got the 'rules is rules' answer.

I think its just an excuse to sell you a 0.5 litre bottle of water for £1.20 (more expensive than AVGAS!). Notice there are no drinking fountains anywhere in British airports, unlike US ones.
BAA monopoly!?

shortstripper

15th Oct 2006, 19:59

Do these rules apply then if you are going through to board you our aircraft! How daft?

SS

IO540

15th Oct 2006, 20:01

I was exactly that, SS.

The rationale for this security is apparently that

a) you are going to be mixing with passengers in the boarding lounge so anything in your luggage (which, note, could be huge backpacks which would never qualify as carry-on in a 737) could be passed to somebody else, and

b) you are going airside and could walk up to a 737 etc and sabotage it.

The first is trivial to address: get GA crews straight out to their plane.

The second is not trivial to address but in most places GA planes are parked so far away from jet transports that if you were taking the half mile walk you would most likely get spotted.

As I say, physical separation is the way to do this, and in most places it would be easy. Unfortunately, most airports are run by people with zero lateral thinking; they never realise that GA (business GA especially) could represent significant traffic if it was supported.

shortstripper

15th Oct 2006, 20:03

Amazing! :rolleyes:

SS

Fuji Abound

15th Oct 2006, 20:07

"on the way to and from the plane"

So did you buy some more to test the system both ways!

BEagle

15th Oct 2006, 20:10

When the hell will someone have the balls to tell these bottom-fondling failed wheel-clampers to sod off and get a life.

The illogical and zealous imposition of the temporary DfT overkill rules by these nazis is becoming an impossible farce.

Why do we tolerate such ridiculous restrictions in our country? There is nothing like this level of paranoid lunacy in mainland Europe.

IO540

15th Oct 2006, 20:13

Actually some bits I've been to in Europe are just the same, but they (having had a moan about the wire cutters, etc) let you through anyway, saying that you are hardly going to hijack yourself :)

Fuji - the toothpaste confiscation system did get tested both ways. I'll let you work out a few ways to do that without buying some. Clue: the plane has more than 1 seat ;)

Fuji Abound

15th Oct 2006, 20:29

540

I am still confused. Did you both test it, but only one get "caught" in each direction.

Oh and I thought you were meant to brush your teeth after every meal when I last listened to the Governments health campaign - I suppose in the small print it says "except on long haul" :} .

baraka

15th Oct 2006, 22:00

Back to the original comment about Norwich and toothpaste.
Went there about a month ago with some colleagues in a warrior. I warned everyone after landing to leave anything " incriminating" such as penknives, rucksacks and toothpaste in the aircraft as we would have to go through security checks. After a pleasant tea break and goodbye to friends in the lounge we then had to go through departures. We all had our photo taken, shoes off, empty pockets, keys and coins etc in the tray, jackets through the x-ray machine and so on. Unfortunately me and one other both had bic lighters which were then confiscated. Quite right too, cos if they had not, we could have gone directly out to the apron and set light to my own aircraft!!
But the day was saved whilst being presented with our belongings on the other side of the xray machine and metal detector; a benevolent security guard took pity and gave us both a brand new box of Bryant & May matches........:confused: .
I will say that all the staff were friendly and courteous to the last.
Oh and we thoroughly enjoyed the 100 yard ride in the 40 seater bus to the stand too.
Funny old life innit?

pistongone

15th Oct 2006, 22:45

Well it would appear the authorities think shoe bombs can only be manufactured in the UK! I whent from East Mids on EZJET To Prague a month ago. Outbound had to take me shoes off etc etc , inbound shoes stayed firmly on me feet and the metal detector didnt pick up my lucky coin, a big commemorative coin for D-D landings! That i forgot was in that little pouch thingy in the right hand pocket of your jeans! They just gotta be seen to be doing something eh? On the same subject, did anyone notice after 9-11 they stopped planes intercepting the ILS for 27L at LHR. Reason was given that they didnt want planes flying over CENTRAL London, so every one would feel safe in Tony Land. They still had to intercept the ILS at Hammersmith giving about 7 or 8 miles to touchdown. Thing is if a typical airliner decided to go east instead of west at that point and accelerated to 300Kn or more, then Tony would have had about 1-2 minutes to decide to shoot it down or not! Only trouble was i dont remember hearing any military types on patrol and the SAMS were still in Stores as they couldnt afford the refit costs! Its Late Sunday night and i felt like a rant, sorry lads but hey, thats life:{ :{ :{

stiknruda

16th Oct 2006, 06:51

Landed at Norwich on Thursday.

Went land side but did NOT go through the terminal:eek: :eek: :eek:

No x-rays. no security jobsworths.

Had my meeting, returned same way with same absence of stupidity.

It can be done!

IO540

16th Oct 2006, 07:11

How?

The standard way, anywhere, is to contact the aeroclub if there is one. They all have access, and lack of formalities.

Going into the passenger terminal is always a mistake.

Prague LKPR does it perfectly. They use an old terminal for all GA and bizjet ops.

BEagle

16th Oct 2006, 07:35

It's all part of the plot to drive GA away from self-important regional 'International Airports'.......

First put up landing fees to stupid levels, biased against light singles. Recent increases at Staverton, sorry, Gloucestershire International, being a typical example. Then insist that all GA pilots and passengers go through some 'GA terminal' complete with uniformed bottom-fondlers and toothpaste-pilferers. Then insist on 'mandatory handling' at extortionate cost. Pretty soon the word will get round - and yet another once GA-friendly aerodrome becomes a virtual no-go zone....

IO540

16th Oct 2006, 09:35

Norwich charges £30 (1400kg MTOW). That is high by the usual UK "decrepit GA field" standards, and is high by the French "local chamber of commerce subsidised" standards like Biarritz etc. But it's not high when compared to most airports that are busy with passenger turboprops and 737-type jets. Lots of European airports charge £50-£150.

£30 is only a small part of the operating cost of a reasonable plane. If you are over 2000kg then you will spend that much per hour in IFR route charges.

What £30 means is that you won't be flying your microlight to Norwich.

But (being the devil's advocate) Norwich, and nearly every other UK airfield for that matter (whose grass gets cut more often than once a year, and whose cracks have been repaired at least once since WW2) cannot make ends meet on the microlight burger runs alone.

This is why every airfield is trying to become "XYZ International". It's not (in most cases, I reckon) that they are desperate to chuck out GA. It's because GA spending is so damn tight, and there is too little of it anyway. The airfield cafe can probably just make ends meet on the chocolate cakes and ham and chips, but the airfield will just rot. Even though the UK is probably the busiest GA country outside the USA, the level of activity is still too low to keep an airfield in business on GA alone.

So business traffic is necessary, but "business" won't go there if the place is decrepit. You won't fly anything half decent (a Seneca, never mind a King Air) to some place ridden with potholes.

UK pilots want £5 landing fees, but apart from fuel sales there is no other income for the airfield.

The business about toothpaste confiscation, GA security etc, is just stupid management. It's simple to set up a "GA" entrance/exit. Security is a business full of small men who feel important, and they make a job out of it. But ultimately it is the management that lets them do this empire building.

If I was going to one of these places on business, I would phone them up and ask for the correct procedure to get through, preferably via one of the clubs.

A PPL at Norwich must be expensive though - £2000 spent on landing fees in the typical PPL there.

dirkdj

16th Oct 2006, 10:24

If you want to have some ammunition for discussions with security types see the movie:

'Terrorstorm' by Alex Jones. You can watch it online on Google Video for free.

These security guys can't help it, the trouble is up higher (much higher).

Justiciar

16th Oct 2006, 22:13

Went land side but did NOT go through the terminal

No x-rays. no security jobsworths.

Had my meeting, returned same way with same absence of stupidity.

It can be done!

Hanger 12?

stiknruda

17th Oct 2006, 07:11

Justiciar

Close!:D

Stik

OVC002

17th Oct 2006, 13:10

How?
The standard way, anywhere, is to contact the aeroclub if there is one. They all have access, and lack of formalities.

Sadly, one International Galactic Spaceport has recently closed off the Aeroclub access gate. Forcing everyone through the toothpaste hating, no chocolate mousse, Minimum Wage Gorilla entrance.

There are a couple of points that the Einstein's who thought this one up might like to consider, prior to their, self congratulatory, CYA, safety audit meeting:

1. If an evil doer wishes to introduce forbidden material airside, they will do it after they land, having flown in from a strip, and not when returning to their aircraft.

2. Er, the Airport fence only goes round a third of the perimeter. :D :ugh:

At best, all the £billions spent on airport security have done, is force a potential terrorist to spend 10 minutes going round the back and/or £10 on some wire cutters. At worst, the money wasted has reduced the resources available for useful security work to the extent that we are all much less safe.

Bright.

niknak

18th Oct 2006, 14:04

Don't forget that the security staff are merely following very strict directives from the Government.
No matter how insane these orders may seem, or are, if they don't implement them, the airport can be prosecuted (and it wouldn't suprise me in the least if there's someone in the Dft just itching to make an example of someone somewhere), and the security bod will lose his job.

As far as landing fees at Norwich are concerned, yes they've gone up and its my opinion that it's complete insanity, but as I say that's just my opinion.
I do know that that the airport owners are negotiating with two resident companies to take over the GA handling completely, this means you'll taxy to the western end, park up and miss the joys of the terminal and associated troubles entirely (what you won't get is a 400 yard ride in a 40 seater bus).
I'd like to think that the fees would come down to a reasonable level, but I'd like to think a lot of things, I can only hope that the new handling agent recognises the value of GA as much as the rest of us.

Just one last thing, for all sorts of reasons, I find the use of the term "nazi" to describe someone who's just doing their job, regardless of who they are or your personal opinion of them, as incredibly offensive, kindly desist.

IO540

18th Oct 2006, 14:25

Don't forget that the security staff are merely following very strict directives from the Government.

Do you have any sort of reference for that, niknak?

niknak

18th Oct 2006, 21:50

Yes, I do.

Its contained within the Dft National Security Plan, updated regularly to those who need to know, (not for distribution to any rank lower than designated Airport Security Manager, so the ordinary staff who take all the flak are not aware of "why", they just are ordered to "do").

I'm sure if you ask nicely they'd be delighted to put you on the distribution list.:rolleyes:

Piltdown Man

18th Oct 2006, 22:30

If you really want a laugh, park on one the nose in stand at Norwich Intergalactic Airport. Now order fuel. The fuel truck will drive from the fuel farm, past the tail of your aircraft, through the security gate and out of the aerodrome. He will then do a "U-Turn" and go up to one of our friends who mans the barrier he has just driven through. "Can I see your pass etc..." Said person will then check his pass, search his truck for liquids and other such non-allowable "non-solids" and allow 20 tons of Jet A1 back in to the "Inner Sanctum". Now you can have some fuel. Nice to see things done properly!

PM.

shortstripper

19th Oct 2006, 06:13

Dft National Security Plan

So is the "Dft" bit short for DAFT? :rolleyes:

SS

A and C

19th Oct 2006, 07:23

The security problems of late have had a devistating effect on all who fly airliners as the "security" changes from airport to airport and what is good for one place is not for another.

A year or so back I wrote a CHIRP on this issue high lighting the stress that not knowing what was going to be prohibited at the whim of the security operative.
The people at CHIRP seemed very interested in the situation but the report that I wrote was not published.

Roll on the latest security rules, I now find that the chances of my night stop kit being in the same place as myself are remote unless I spend about 40% of the time that I should be spend on the pre-flight planning chasing the crew bags and making sure that the bags are on the aircraft (in the hold).

My union BALPA knows about this and has been trying to work with the DfT but has been stonewalled each meeting and pilots are now treated as part of the problem with NO conssesions made for aircrew.
Some of the airports (BAA) have made reprisentations to relax the regulations for crew but this has also been rejected.
But it is interesting to note that the Musicians union has got the regulations changed very quickly to let them bring there musical instruments into the cabin, this can only be because of the bad PR that would have resulted from concerts being canceled because of "airport security".

The bottom line is that most aircrew who have to fly in and out of the UK think that the security mesures are a joke and that they are only in place to protect the civil servants at the DfT.

In by opinion the DfT are only interested in protecting themselfs and there jobs, have no real insight into how the industry works and won't work with BAPLA, the BAA and other industry reprsenatives because it will highlight how little they know about the business that they regulate.

Worst of all the DfT have in the eyes of those in the industry turned security into a bad joke that is a daly irritant to us, Security is a real and important issue that should be adressed by the aviation industry as a whole but insted the DfT seem to be happy with removing toothpase from the pilots and lipgloss from the cabin crew.

BEagle

19th Oct 2006, 08:41

"Dft National Security Plan"

DfT National Socialist Plan, more like.

"Befehl ist Befehl!"

Just back from 8 trips areound Europe with LH. Only the UK has such absurd rules, travel between Schengen countries is so much simpler. Madrid-Frankfurt-Bremen required the sort of check we used to have before the 'liquid explosives' nonsense...and that was it. Just gate-to-gate at Frankfurt, no additional sicherheitsdienst groping.

Whereas Birmingham-Frankfurt-Bremen requires belt, shoes, watch, computer etc etc to be removed at BHX.... At FRA you are 'non-Schengen Untermensch. Verdammte Ausländer!' - so it's on to the bus (I hate to think where they learned how to pack so many people into those damn buses) and a magical mystery tour of the nether regions of the airport. Then up an escalator, through passport control, down another escalator, through another security check, down in a lift, along the time tunnel, up in another lift......

If only we had basic national identity cards (not the excessive things Trust-me-Tone wants us to pay £100 for.....) and were part of the Schengen community, we wouldn't have all this nonsense.

Let's have intelligent profiling and some realistic security checks!

h73kr

10th Nov 2006, 23:37

My 2p.....

Security staff at Norwich International (don't you just know it's going to be a poxy regional airport when they feel the need to add 'International' to their title by the way, Heathrow International, Gatwick International anyone?!) have always been very pleasant, courteous and down to earth whenever I've flown out from there, which given their paltry wages must be an effort. However, as a wider issue these 'security' measures really p#ss me off these days. Last month flew out of Gatwick and the queues were immense and I was totally not in the mood for adopting the 'good 'ol British public Dunkirk spirit' crap which they were obviously relying on. My loud comment of 'I'm soooo glad we are winning the war on terror' was NOT appreciated as I tasted my baby sons nappy cream after being herded for ages through security and having deodorants binned which I bought again 5 minutes later. This week flew to Zurich from LCY with just hand baggage. Took no deodorant, hair gel or toothpaste as knew it would get taken from me, but the LCY website implied I could buy new products once I was through security. Through security - no toothpaste, only hair gel was some poncey small tube for £13, and only deodorant was small tin of Hugo Boss stuff for another £13!:eek: So, £26 lighter for what I can get from Boots for a fiver, and in a bad mood, I board plane. Next day on way back through security at Zurich confiscate my tiny but relatively highly expensive Hugo Boss deodorant (which I managed to use just once), because 'it's too big to take through'. Security seemed surprised that again I was a tad miffed by this. All this for a security alert that ended with the supposed perpetrators released without charge. Don't get me wrong, I know we have to be careful (primarily thanks to our own dense meddling in other peoples countries), but for Christs sake, as a trained aviation security adviser said at the time of the first panic measures 'I could look at any check-in queue at any time and instantly judge that 95% of them pose no threat whatsoever', instead EVERY single person get's targeted - is that intelligence led security? :D

--- waits to be shot down in flames now....(no pun intended) ...for my bad attitude! ;) I just hate losing civil liberty bit by bit in the name of keeping our 'freedom', seems to me the terrorists have substantially won!

Whirlygig

10th Nov 2006, 23:46

flyingfemme

11th Nov 2006, 07:14

.
"Can I see your boarding pass please madam! (Sadly I am no longer of an age where I get called "Miss"). "I don't have one, it's a private flight". "Can't go through without a boarding pass". "It's a private flight" etc etc.
So print yourself a few generic boarding passes and carry one in your handbag/flightbag - that's what I used to do for a "crew id card" and it's always worked. :cool:

niknak

11th Nov 2006, 21:10

The problem with Norwich is that they don't understand the concept of private flights.

Last summer I had the pleasure of flying with Grainger in a Jetranger from Norwich. His helicopter, his passenger.

"Can I see your boarding pass please madam! (Sadly I am no longer of an age where I get called "Miss"). "I don't have one, it's a private flight". "Can't go through without a boarding pass". "It's a private flight" etc etc.

So for anyone coming into Norwich, try to get Sterling to carry out the handling - it'll be much more simple!

Cheers

Whirls
For those who don't know, and Whirly is clearly amongst those, an establishment at Hanger 10, other than Sterling, has apperently been offering to collect landing fees, provide pre flight facilities and all at no charge to the pilot, they also offer a a full resturant service (which is where they make the few pence profit), but allegedly the airport authority hasn't taken them up on their offer.
I've no reason to suspect that the service offered by Sterling isn't just as professional, but I know for a fact that they don't have full dining facilities - if the two establishments could work together it would be a plus for G/A.

IO540

12th Nov 2006, 08:17

So, Niknak, what does all this CIA-secret-agent-speak mean? Next time I fly to Norwich, do I "request taxi to Hangar 10" or do I have to be more specific?

Cuillin

13th Nov 2006, 09:27

Excellent posting by A&C in respect of the security problems we, who earn a living by flying, face everytime we go to work.

The basic requirements of airport security are a 'no argument' discussion but there are big variations between airports throughout the UK and the applications of security measures at a local level vary immensely.

A few views of my own (biased towards BAA at Gatwick)-

Why are aircrew given a considerably harder time going through security than pax? We know you have been told to 'concentrate' on us - but why?
Excellent cartoon in the Telegraph a few weeks ago with the wife searching the husband as he comes through the door and a guilty looking moggy next to them. Wife saying to husband - "Well somebody has been bringing dead birds into the house but it seems a bit unfair to pick on the cat"!

Why do I have to take my shoes off, walk through security, go to pick up my shoes and flightbag then be told to take off my jacket, return through the scanner and walk through it again (still minus shoes)? Why do I have to take my jacket off but not my trousers (I was tempted)? Is there something that can be hidden in a jacket but not in the trousers I am still wearing? Are you really trying to wind people up or just ignorant?

When I ask why BAA security staff are allowed to walk from the coffee shop, walk around the scanner, place said coffee on a table airside without being security checked then I am told this doesn't happen. Sorry mate, witnessed this a few days ago. Who is the biggest security risk?

Etc, etc.

Local variations on a big scale and is totally unacceptable. 'Make it up as you go along security' with no ability to question the farcical rules. Keeps the politicians happy though and they all think they are doing a great job.

Rant over.

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: