This subject crops up from time to time, and it has been posted in the past that if you have to ask the question then you couldn't possibly understand the answer, That's not a smartarse remark, it's just that like a number of pastimes (fishing, golf etc.), some people instinctively "get it" while others will never see the attraction however well or often it's explained.
I appreciate your annoyance at continually getting 'suspicious person' calls only to find it's just another hapless spotter(s). I suspect these calls come from people who are either overly nervous or simply bloody-minded (in true British fashion). Someone in your position ought to be able to distinguish spotting from something more nefarious; spotters are open and obvious in their activities, and a telescope, camera, radio or notebook are not things the average terrorist is likely to be waving about. It does require a frame of mind incorporating both tolerance and geniality, something not usually associated with law enforcement or security personnel unfortunately.
I don't buy the 'extra eyes' argument. As you say, the spotters are watching the planes and not much else and I doubt many would spot a terrorist if they tripped over one. It is possible (though not verifiable) that the mere presence of a group of spotters is enough to deter terrorist activities in that particular location. The point is also made that the immediate perimeter is an unlikely location from which to mount an attack anyway, the bad guys probably preferring somewhere a little more umm... discreet.
I have a lot of spare time for googling and such, and have found that the spotter/photographer subculture, as evidenced by websites and blogs, is surprisingly active. Whether any of this information is of the slightest interest or use to the terrorists (as alleged), I can't say. So far all it sems to have done is embarrass the CIA; which is not necessarily a Bad Thing. The authorities would presumably prefer it if spotters would simply go away, but despite some draconian measures in places, I don't see this happening. It is encouraging that you advocate spotters' facilites, but such would require a bit more effort than the LHR visitors' centre, which seems to have been intended for casual plane-watchers being essentially useless (I'm told) for serious spotting. Seems self-defeating to me - the more you drive spotters into being furtive, the more nonsense calls you and your colleagues are likely to get.
Sorry for rambling, but this is the Spectators' Gallery
