Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Heightened security at U.S airports (and overseas?)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Heightened security at U.S airports (and overseas?)

Old 2nd Jul 2014, 22:12
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Heightened security at U.S airports (and overseas?)

Airport security is being increased at American airports amid reports two terror networks are working together on a bomb that could evade existing measures.

US asks for more security at some foreign airports | Mail Online

Washington Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson ordered beefed up security at foreign airports from where aircraft fly directly to the US.

So here's my question - how do they get airports overseas to beef up security?

How or why would an airport say in Pakistan improve security when the TSA have no jurisdiction?

Also, what kind of new measures might they be?
JohnnyRocket is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2014, 22:53
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Johnny

I am no expert but I flew not long after 9/11, Aust to US direct on either Emirates or Qantas.

Apart from triple checking ID's (more than one) at counter and before boarding, checking VISA at counter, all bags
- both those going into the hold and carry on were inspected, questions asked etc.

That's all I can remember but it made checking in a PITA.

Note sure they can do much more than that but Aust and the US get on so if they ask, we will do. Not sure what other countries would do.

Edit
As per below, other stuff goes on as well that we don't see !

Last edited by 500N; 2nd Jul 2014 at 23:25.
500N is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2014, 23:20
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I know this is not the forum where this goes but:

How or why would an airport say in Pakistan improve security when the TSA have no jurisdiction?
I believe the responsibility is on the airline to show that they have read, understood and implemented recommended actions to address the TSA concerns.

So if the airline flies to the US from Pakistan they probably will comply with these temporary measures.

Of course I'm curious what impact it will have on me as a passenger, but some of this stuff is behind the scenes.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 00:52
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,067
Received 43 Likes on 28 Posts
Nothing new to this. How many airlines are banned from flying in European airspace? Dozens from the list I saw. If an airline and or airport wishes operations to a particular destination, they must play ball.
West Coast is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 01:50
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Are we in for a period, of more continued grief & hassle for the normal law abiding & cooperative pax. Much easier for the thugs at many worldwide Airports, many who pass for Security Staff, to be rude & insulting to such pax & leave the real bad boys to get on with it. I will always be polite & cooperative when going through the airport system, it's easier in the end that way, but I expect in return, to be treated with tact, consideration & respect. US Airports & Dept of Homeland Security please note.
kaikohe76 is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 06:30
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by West Coast
Nothing new to this. How many airlines are banned from flying in European airspace? Dozens from the list I saw.
Not the same thing. The vast majority on the list are there because of lack of regulatory oversight by their government regulator and even there some airlines are considered safe, even though their oversight is poor.

Very few of the airlines have any intention of flying to the EU, or have the equipment to do so. I see these 'bans' suiting internal EU politics, rather than making flying safer.

The latest list is here. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...oc/list_en.pdf

I think the answer is that those responsible for security will increase their security checks because it is in their interests to do so. The US can refuse permission for entry into their airspace of any or all aircraft coming from a particular airport. No airport would want to be on such a blacklist.
ExXB is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 08:59
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the good old days of "tanks to Heathrow" we'd know it was because the Govt were trying to bury some other bad news

It's been quite a while since we had a scare like this so either

a) there is genuine information or

b) the TSA are getting bored
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 09:31
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: frying pan
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
HH Nobody is getting bored . Next Time It will be different.
hifly787 is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 09:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: sussex
Age: 75
Posts: 192
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Profiling

Speaking as a customer, rather than an aviation professional, maybe this latest panic will at least move the relevant authorities toward an entirely rational - and I would say essential - procedure, namely passenger profiling. Which might be better described as risk assessment.

This is currently an area of absurd politically correct sensitivity which has the effect of making everyone unnecessarily more vulnerable. The same level of security resources, allocated where they're needed rather than blanketed across the board, would result in more effective controls. Wouldn't they?

Obviously there could still be attempts to circumvent such profiling however it seems unlikely that individuals falling outside the, ahem, target demographic, could be persuaded (or paid) to murder and die for a cause not their own.
skridlov is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 11:43
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We've seen that terrorist organizations can have native sympathizers in almost any country, ready enough to 'get even' with a society they weren't able to connect with. Really successful screening involves knowing enough about each individual in advance of their arrival at the airport.

Perhaps NSA does need all those phone records.
poorjohn is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 11:45
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No doubt this will give the airport security muppets in the UK even more incentive to try even more harder to extract our bone marrow when passing through the security screening. I for one, as a pax, will do all I can to refrain from passing through the UK..east or west....
carlyle is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 12:16
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by skridlov

Obviously there could still be attempts to circumvent such profiling however it seems unlikely that individuals falling outside the, ahem, target demographic, could be persuaded (or paid) to murder and die for a cause not their own.
You don't mean like Richard Reid, or Samantha Lewthwaite, do you? Or the Europeans travelling to Syria to 'share in the experience'?

The Israelis don't profile. They consider that every passenger is potentially a black hat.
ExXB is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 12:20
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 67
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...on a bomb that could evade existing measures.
I don't understand this one. The mitigation against a process/device that may be able to evade existing measures is to do more of the same? That makes no sense whatsoever. A new threat requires a new response. But as ever, the numpties "securing our safety" won't have a clue other than to be ruder to everybody. So, unless we start profiling (a certain organisation near Cheltenham that costs (or should it be wastes?) billions a year should have a list of the most likely) passengers, our radical zealots will be able to press home their attack.

Just out of interest, when will we start getting value for money out of our intelligence and security services? Our Foreign and Commonwealth office have failed to predict a single war since Crimea. Even the "redtops" have a better feel for what is about to unfold. And the mentally challenged running DfT have never taken any action in advance of any threat - they only respond after something has badly gone wrong (a bit like the Catholic church). I would have hoped for some imagination from them or am I asking for too much?
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 12:34
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Simply Towers.
Posts: 865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry Piltdown but you clearly dont have a clue about how the Intelligence Services operate or about what they have contributed towards our security in recent years.
Also, passenger profiling has been a counter terrorism tactic for a few years now.
This article from the Guardian may be of interest....unless of course you dont believe any of it.
MI5 chief says 34 UK terror plots disrupted since 7/7 attacks | UK news | The Guardian
Simplythebeast is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 14:17
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 67
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe some of it, but I remain unconvinced we are getting value for our money and skeptical about their self proclaimed and totally unverifiable successes. The secret service is exactly that but what I would expect from them is behind the scenes advice to the DfT so that proactive security measures can be taken to neautralise predicted threats. And I've not witnessed that over the past few years. And with proper advice, I would have expected the DfT to have been able to relax certain measures of the years - but that has not happened either.

Yes, I want to live in a safe world, but I want to live as well. I'll not cower in a corner just because someone says there are nasty people out there. I'm convinced we can do better.
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 14:32
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From the UK Mirror:

Huge queues at airports after US warning of bomb 'between 9pm and 11pm tonight'

Jul 03, 2014 14:35
By Steve Robson

The US Embassy in Uganda has told citizens to change travel plans amid warnings of a "specific" terror threat at the country's airport

Security is being increased at British airports after the US warned of a possible terror attack between 9pm and 11pm tonight.

The US Embassy in Uganda issued an urgent email warning citizens of a "specific threat" to the country's Entebbe International Airport within hours.

It said information from Uganda's police indicated that the attack could take place between 9 pm and 11 pm local time on Thursday, adding that citizens planning to travel at that time to consider reviewing their arrangements.
Huge queues at airports after US warning of bomb 'between 9pm and 11pm tonight' - Mirror Online

Hard to tell from the remainder of the article whether the specific threat is only for Uganda flights.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 15:50
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,067
Received 43 Likes on 28 Posts
Not the same thing.
It is the same in that a nation or groups of nations in the case of the EU has banned operations for safety concerns. The EU has set standards for those airlines to resume operations to Europe, just the same as the US has set standards to maintain operations to the US.
West Coast is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 17:45
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Simply Towers.
Posts: 865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pitdown, I can assure you that there is a regulary exchange of information between the Intelligence services the DfT and in some cases direct to individual operators. There are good reasons why things havent changed as much as you would want, its not just coincidental.
Lets just be thankful they are there doing what they do, out of the public eye.
Simplythebeast is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 20:55
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnnyRocket
So here's my question - how do they get airports overseas to beef up security?

How or why would an airport say in Pakistan improve security when the TSA have no jurisdiction?

Also, what kind of new measures might they be?
The way these things have been done in the past is to set up a team of US security personnel at the foreign airports who do a stringent further check on pax after the in-house security team have done their checks. Then they possibly carry out further random or even 100% searches at the gate as people board.
Ian W is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2014, 20:58
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 594
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Just what I need as I fly out tonight queues for miles!!!!!!
fergineer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.