Originally Posted by
Plane.Silly
Thinks there's a bit more to it than that, like for example when things go wrong as a result of passengers (i.eterrorists). On a Train, worst case scenario, the line(s) is blocked and a few trains are delayed or cancelled. Worst case for aviation? i only need to reference the two numbers either side of 10 to make my point there. If everyone can get peace of mind from a few extra checks, which inevitably take time then i believe its a price worth paying. It then depends on specific airports to determine how long you wait there, the likes of STN/MAN are some of the worst.
Also worth considering is the frequency and reason for travel. Most Train passengers are commuters so there's the everyday element and the need to avoid delays where possible. Aviations is much less frequent aside from a few commuters, but even then they won't be twice daily
Could I just correct you with your worst case train scenario. On 11.03.2004 193 people died and over 2000 were injured on trains in Madrid. Just over a year later 52 died in London. Those events have not led to security checks delaying passengers because it simply cannot be done.
Because there are only a handful of airports compared to train stations it is possible to carry out both identity checks and screening of everything being taken on board. I'm perfectly happy with that, but it doesn't have to equate to long queues. That's simply a matter of adequately resourcing the requirement. Of course the airports are more than happy to fast track you through the process if you're prepared to pay for the privilege. Which proves that queues are not required to provide better security, in my opinion.