Airport security confusion...why no standardisation?

[Contacttower]

The recent upheaval at Bournemouth got me wondering why is it that every airport seems to have slightly different procedures for general aviation security? One would sort of assume that everyone was reading from the same guidelines/rules (presumably issued by the Department for Transport?).

The number of different procedures seems very confusing...for example...

Southampton...at Signature there is no security for private flights and you are let out by the handling staff.

Same at Glasgow...

At Edinburgh for some reason GA seems to be in the restricted zone and one has to go through security...

Southend...even if you are parked outside of the restricted zone you still have to go through the scanner from the private terminal but are allowed to take normally restricted items through...other organisations on the field like flying clubs have no such restrictions I believe though.

Exeter...grass parking as far as I'm aware is not in the restricted zone but bags have do go through security...although security staff seem to have little interest in their contents (this may have changed it's been a few years since I was there)

Newquay...similar to others in so far as GA is outside the restricted zone and therefore no security.

Bournemouth...used to be able to get airside on the north side if you knew the codes but now the DfT have decided that everyone must be "authorised" by one of the companies on the field like Airtime or whoever which simply involves an identity check and then one must be let through either by handling, Airtime, security themselves or whoever else is allowed to do so...I know Bournemouth has been pulled up for lax security but surely there are still lots of commercial airports operating on the basis that they used to?

If one turns up for a commercial flight one knows the rules...they are the same everywhere in the EU pretty much. When I go flying myself though and use an airport with commercial aviation I never seem to know what to expect and have been told different things at different times at the same airport (Southend for example) about what the rules are. Every airport seems to do things slightly differently...why is this though? It seems to completely devalue the system...

Go to France and again things are different...

[BackPacker]

The only consistency I've seen is that if there's a chance you are going to mix with commercial passengers, and thus have the ability to pass them prohibited items after they've gone through security, then you are subject to (more or less) the same security restrictions as these passengers. Sometimes the security applied to you is slightly relaxed but then you'll be escorted to your aircraft so you'll not be able to mix.

But beyond that, I'm as baffled as you are by the inconsistency. At my home base there are two GA aprons, each with their own security booth. Up till about six months ago, one of those booths had a metal detector and an x-ray machine. You had to pass through the metal detector, your bag through the x-ray machine (which never detected my leatherman by the way). But the other security booth only had a metal detector, no x-ray machine. And if you arrived by vehicle you had to go through the metal detector, the bag you brought into the booth had to go through the x-ray, but the car and contents only got a very brief inspection for hidden persons.

Recently they relaxed the rules and beyond making sure that only authorized persons get to "airside", there are no more inspections. Fair enough I'd say.

Furthermore, since about six months we need to issue a hand-written boarding card to each and every passenger, and keep a hand-written log of all issued boarding passes. Supposedly every month or so the hand-written logs and the boarding card stubs are sent to the central security department where they are either filed or discarded. I have no idea whatsoever how this enhances security. (Now if this were an online system with real-time checking of names against some sort of database, then at least I could see a theoretical security benefit. In addition to some privacy issues...:=)

[Contacttower]

Recently they relaxed the rules and beyond making sure that only authorized persons get to "airside", there are no more inspections. Fair enough I'd say.

Well it's good to see rules being relaxed in a controlled manner. Is it Schiphol you fly from?

The point about mixing with other passengers is, as you say, generally consistent. At least it seems so for the most part at UK airports. But in France at some smaller regional airports I've gone airside without there being any security and not far from commercial aircraft. Walked right past a 737 at one French airport after having been let out (can't recall if I'd been searched or not but I was unescorted) of the terminal yet was shouted at in the UK for walking past a commercial aircraft having just got out of mine. A lot of French airports have side gates as well which if one knows the code for you can get airside without any security at all.

It seems different airports are interested in different things, in France one is frequently ask to produce one's licence (although by no means always) but in the UK this almost never happens...despite searching one to the nth degree they never actually ask to see any credentials. Sometimes they seem very interested in the aircraft docs; at Charleroi I was asked to produce the whole suite of documents and had to go through security on the way back even though GA is on the other side of the runway to the passenger terminal.

Passenger 'boarding cards' seem like a bizarre idea as well, the only airport I've come across it being necessary was at Waterford in Ireland...where I had to go to some office and get them written out for me...I could have just told the women any old name though to put on them...

It would just be nice to know what to expect when one returns to one's aircraft...

[ExSp33db1rd]

Why are you surprised ? The the whole aviation security thing Worldwide is a farce designed and perpetrated by idiots, the bad guys will still do precisely what they want, when they want to do it. QED

[riverrock83]

Its probably better than the alternative.
If they decided to standardise, they are going to go for the highest common factor - which would mean being treated like commercial passengers everywhere! Imagine the issues you would have bringing in that extra litre of oil to top up the engine...

Maybe whats needed is a few lines in the AIP (or would that be a security risk in itself...) or be told when getting PPR what to expect?

[A and C]

Security has become a vast licence to print money by employing low grade staff to impose invented restrictions on us, the security parasites have us by the balls by insisting that these invented checks are necessary and the government is poorly placed to restrain them because they fear being seen as weak on security in the eyes of the press.

In short we have the security parasites holding the government to ransom by using the press and having the user (us) pay for it.

Don't look for any consistency because there is none, security is run by some very clever people who are lining their pockets by employing idiots to write the rules and even more stupid people to enforce them.

The real problem is that the security industry has by the way they abuse and mistreat airport staff manufactured a situation were they have brought the security system into such disrepute that they have destroyed any chance of getting any cooperation from anyone working at an airport. The ideal situation is security in depth by having all airport staff on side......... NO Chance ! Most airport staff now see the security system as the biggest impediment to a days work.

As a private pilot it is a very corrosive atmosphere you are now treading and I would advise caution when dealing with the security people, and request for logical treatment will be met with first a NO and then if you persist they are likely to invent some way that you have insulted them or abused them and it will escalate in to a very nasty situation in which the security system is judge and jury.

[abgd]

I ended up having a longish chat with the police because I had walked to an airport for flying lessons which had been deemed suspicious. They took copies of my passport etc. and nothing more came of it. I had evaded them without realising they were searching for me, and they had clearly gone to a fair amount of trouble to find out who I was.

I often wonder how much scrutiny we come under when applying for a licence. Presumably they can't disallow licences to people who've passed their flying tests...

[ExSp33db1rd]

I realise that this is a Private Pilot forum, but I are one now, but if I were still in my airline job I'd doubtless be in Guantanamo Bay wearing an orange jump suit by now, having dared to challenge one of the Hitler proteges who bar the way at every airport, I truly couldn't put up with the crap that my onetime colleagues have to go through daily, just to get to their aeroplanes ( aeroplanes containing more liquid than 10 ml., dangerous weapons like fire axes, and dining cutlery - even plastic would poke an eye out before it broke - fire extinguishers etc etc. and built with controls that would enable the pilot to fly it into a tall building )

World is truly mad.

Concur totally with A and C.

[Maoraigh1]

After going through security to fly my wood and fabric taildragger on a solo 5 leg cross-country, at a subsequent airfield I had to go to the gate security hut, pass my belt, wallet, etc through the xray, and walk through the arch scanner, before returning to my aircraft - which still had my flight bag in it. I had only been to the tower, which is not adjacent to the perimeter. (U.K 2010)

[airpolice]

Two weeks ago I flew from a busy GA airfield which has no gate in the fence, or, on some days, any physical barrier to the apron. Sometimes there is a string of metal barriers, but they are easy to move.

After hours, You can drive in from the main road and walk to the aircraft carrying whatever you like. Startup, Taxi and Go.

The way it ought to be!

Tomorrow I'm going to Heathrow (as a pax) and I expect to be subjected to the full boona shoes and belt thing. I'm gonna be in T5 just long enough to change aircraft and come home again, I expect to spend more time in Security lines than anywhere else.

[maxred]

And the whole irony is that the security companies are run by.....Let's just say, you're names not down so u don't get in...

[ExSp33db1rd]

Like airpolice said...........

This year I flew with a friend in a Cessna 172 directly over LAX ( Los Angeles Intnl, ) The airfield we departed from had no gates or security, no flight plan was required to be filed, no requirement to talk to ATC - even LAX tower - just follow the procedure for a VFR Special Rules route, North to South at 3,500 and advise similar traffic on a unicom freq. The northbound route is at 4500. ( this is a VFR 'corridor' at right angles to the E/W runway alignment - imagine doing that over Heathrow without talking to ATC - or even if talking!!)

I have a superb photo taken over the centre of LAX, large aircraft full of passengers easily identifiable - my camera viewfinder could have been a bomb sight - think about it. No security needed, great fun. ( P.s. don't tell the FAA, they'll stop it ! )

Next day I had to take my shoes off to board the Boeing - No I said, as I stood in front of a large sign advising that passengers over the age of 75 no longer have to remove shoes, Yes, said the Hitleress, because YOU are going international. ( tho' the notice didn't say that )

So ... it's now OK for those over 75 to shoe-bomb American nationals on domestic flights, but not foreign flights ??

World's gone mad.

Hitleress also told my wife to remove her passport from around her neck in one of those passport holding pouches purchased for that very purpose. You're only allowed one piece of cabin baggage and one 'personal item', your handbag is your 'personal item' and your passport constitutes a third piece of baggage - get rid of it. We were travelling International. Think about it.

World's gone mad.

[Pace]

It is a massive industry and there lies the problem. They are forever looking for further so called security holes and then plugging them at further huge profit to themselves and hassle to the public.

I am forever amazed living in London at the thousands of people who stream every day onto the London tube system.
The trains are packed with equal volumes of people to those carried on an airline.
At peak times all manner of people drag cases bags or whatever onto these tube trains totally unchallenged.
Why would any possible terrorist go to the trouble of attacking an aircraft when he has such easy pickings dragging a case full of explosives onto the London Tube?

I had the ridiculous situation of arguing that a shampoo I had contained less than 100 mg and had it removed.

The world has gone mad

Pace

[maxred]

It really makes me laugh when the vast poplace who want to fly in a commercial aeroplane, line up like sheep to the slaughter, some all giggling and willingly taking their shoes off, taking their belts off, standing in front of 'body scanners', the last dehuminising vestage, all dignity gone.

The security companies of course follow the Government mantra of keeping the general population - afraid - therefore keeping the politicians in a job, telling us how well they are doing in keeping us, safe, and keeping the massive security industry feeding at the golden trough.

I came through Heathrow a few months back, T5, and I watched two Afro Caribean lads, about 19, with their hi viz security vests on. They were giggling and making fun of some older women, (European), laughing at their passport photographs. They thought they were not seen, but I saw them, and heard them. I nearly got locked up the last time I made a fuss at Heathrow security, so I left it. But I thought to myself, this is a total and absolute bloody farce.

Meanwhile the real home grown terrorists are wandering about shooting children, while we drone kill the supposed terrorists children.

World gone mad does not even begin to describe what is going on..

[maxred]

One further comment regarding the GA side of things. All pilots who own an aeroplane, are on some kind of register, be it CAA, FAA, and anyone who has filed a GAR, is known to SB, and anyone who has flown from one of the larger airports, will again be known to SB. It is all vetted.

I also suggest that the majority of pilots, who own aeroplanes, or who hold licences, are not about to use their SEP, or MEP, to impact Tower Bridge. And if they wanted to, it probably would be the simplest thing in the world to do, but, no one has done it. The very rare cases in the world, where it is 'supposed' to have been the motive, only ended up with the poor pilot totalling himself, and no one else:confused:

It would be the simplest thing for all pilots, vetted of course, to have an approved airside pass, usable throughout Europe, but we do not have one - why not??