Security Costs too High
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
robo,
There is a program here in the US called CLEAR Registered Taveller that requires you to go through the same security lines, but allows some exemptions depending on circumstances (ie. shoes are scanned while wearing them and can be left on in certain cases). In order to use this program you are required to undertake an FBI background check, provide personal details, and undertake fingerprint or iris scans. There is also an annual fee.
The point is that this is a service available to the public that allows you to decide whether an encroachment on your personal liberties is worth it to receive an expedited and painless experience at the airport. If we can provide assurance as to the identity and motives of passengers, it would not be beyond the wit of man to extend this service to all Flight crew, thus providing a far more robust ID verification than currently happens.
What is to stop someone who appears to be a pilot, if exempted from a search, from taking explosives airside and stashing them or passing them on?
The point is that this is a service available to the public that allows you to decide whether an encroachment on your personal liberties is worth it to receive an expedited and painless experience at the airport. If we can provide assurance as to the identity and motives of passengers, it would not be beyond the wit of man to extend this service to all Flight crew, thus providing a far more robust ID verification than currently happens.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why single out aviation???? That is indeed a good question. I know for a fact that here in the US, various police forces have done a lot of heaving thinking/planning/training with regard to the many other ways that "they" can hit us...
But airliners can inflict much collateral damage as 9/11 demonstrated. Explosives in a bus, a train, a cinema or shopping mall are serious threats but not nearly as dramatic as aviation plots.
Can you imagine, just for a moment, if the plot to explode multiple trans-Atlantic flights in the summer of 2006 had been successful?
"They" are more patient than we are! "They" suspect that we will waiver and lower our guard eventually. And "they" are already here, already among us.
But airliners can inflict much collateral damage as 9/11 demonstrated. Explosives in a bus, a train, a cinema or shopping mall are serious threats but not nearly as dramatic as aviation plots.
Can you imagine, just for a moment, if the plot to explode multiple trans-Atlantic flights in the summer of 2006 had been successful?
"They" are more patient than we are! "They" suspect that we will waiver and lower our guard eventually. And "they" are already here, already among us.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Dirka-dirka-stan
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quote
The industry now wants the government to contribute, but ministers insist the aviation industry must foot the bill.
If the aviation industry must foot the bill then the aviation industry must have a say in what level and means of security is enforced!
Lets get rid of some of the very lame and knee jerk reaction security measures put in place by the government. After all we are paying for it!
Get the airline companies together and form a security group to address this problem. Tell the government they're over the top with some of it's measures. Get rid of the useless $1.99/hr guard who doesn't know a pilot from a passenger and employ proper security who know what to look for and you will be using less of them.
The security mentality in LHR and other places around the world remind me of Orsen Wells 1984 and also V for Vendetta. Government crackdown on movement, thought and travel.
The industry now wants the government to contribute, but ministers insist the aviation industry must foot the bill.
If the aviation industry must foot the bill then the aviation industry must have a say in what level and means of security is enforced!
Lets get rid of some of the very lame and knee jerk reaction security measures put in place by the government. After all we are paying for it!
Get the airline companies together and form a security group to address this problem. Tell the government they're over the top with some of it's measures. Get rid of the useless $1.99/hr guard who doesn't know a pilot from a passenger and employ proper security who know what to look for and you will be using less of them.
The security mentality in LHR and other places around the world remind me of Orsen Wells 1984 and also V for Vendetta. Government crackdown on movement, thought and travel.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Selective Screening Only
You can half the security staff by allowing 80% of people through.
Let all "suitably looking" families, with children through without any search.
Let all "suitably looking" elderly ladies and gentlemen through without any search.
Leat ALL kids through without any search.
If we then screen the ones that may not be "suitable" we're already half way there.
I for one would allow any unscreened British family on my flight, had I been allowed to. By this I mean, the obvious, innocent, real holiday going family.
Why waste all this energy stripping everyone, using resources stupidly and so bluntly.
Wise up UK!
Let all "suitably looking" families, with children through without any search.
Let all "suitably looking" elderly ladies and gentlemen through without any search.
Leat ALL kids through without any search.
If we then screen the ones that may not be "suitable" we're already half way there.
I for one would allow any unscreened British family on my flight, had I been allowed to. By this I mean, the obvious, innocent, real holiday going family.
Why waste all this energy stripping everyone, using resources stupidly and so bluntly.
Wise up UK!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Fool's Hole - in total agreement. As pilot promoted action has achieved nothing with regard to penetrating the blinkered, fantasy world inhabited by officials at the DfT, perhaps the 'industry' shifting arse into gear might make the politicos and bureaucrats listen. One can only hope but the reality is that the security measures currently in place have no bearing or relevance on 99% of the passengers upon whom it is inflicted. Let's concentrate on the 1% and let the rest of us get on with it.
Apache for HEMS - Strafe those Survivors!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everybody is dancing around it, but the simple fact is that "profiling" is not a dirty word and it is effective. I know that there are civil liberties arguements, but I already feel that my civil liberties are being well and truly abused by the current system.
El Al used profiling very effectively a few years ago to find the bomb hidden in the luggage of an innocent (and I mean Genuinely innocent) Irish lady by her arab boyfriend (nice boyfriend!). I was security screened by an american airlines employee last year, as I was travelling to the states on a one way ticket to ferry an aircraft back. I have no objection to this kind of sensible targeted security, but the nonsense that goes on at the moment is the security equivalent of a goalie diving for a ball he can't reach, it is making gestures, it looks good but its effectiveness is highly questionable.
I would also personally favour being subjected to a proper enhanced background security check, with fingerprints and iris scans, if it meant that I could be issued with a unique pass, perhaps with a chip and pin, that was useable at all UK airports. They were willing to do something similar for passport checks at Heathrow, so the technology exists and that also kind of undermines any security arguement against it.
Great if it could be europe wide, but lets face it, where do most delays/problems occur, yes, in the UK
El Al used profiling very effectively a few years ago to find the bomb hidden in the luggage of an innocent (and I mean Genuinely innocent) Irish lady by her arab boyfriend (nice boyfriend!). I was security screened by an american airlines employee last year, as I was travelling to the states on a one way ticket to ferry an aircraft back. I have no objection to this kind of sensible targeted security, but the nonsense that goes on at the moment is the security equivalent of a goalie diving for a ball he can't reach, it is making gestures, it looks good but its effectiveness is highly questionable.
I would also personally favour being subjected to a proper enhanced background security check, with fingerprints and iris scans, if it meant that I could be issued with a unique pass, perhaps with a chip and pin, that was useable at all UK airports. They were willing to do something similar for passport checks at Heathrow, so the technology exists and that also kind of undermines any security arguement against it.
Great if it could be europe wide, but lets face it, where do most delays/problems occur, yes, in the UK
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fool's Hole,
I understand your logic but consider this.
If someone believes in their cause sufficiently to commit suicide, what is to stop them choosing also to sacrifice their partner and children? The family might not be aware of what is in store.
Who is a suicide bomber? A hate-filled preacher or a special needs teacher? A psychopathic misfit or a talented young cricketer? The London bombers included the two latter.
This enemy will adapt quickly and change their tactics. How old is the next suicide bomber? Who knows.
I'm not being a scare-monger as I have a vested interest in preventing terrorism (as do we all). However, you can't put finely-tuned measures in place overnight so you have to use blanket measures at first.
Bear with the security; it's being done with your best interests at heart!
I understand your logic but consider this.
If someone believes in their cause sufficiently to commit suicide, what is to stop them choosing also to sacrifice their partner and children? The family might not be aware of what is in store.
Who is a suicide bomber? A hate-filled preacher or a special needs teacher? A psychopathic misfit or a talented young cricketer? The London bombers included the two latter.
This enemy will adapt quickly and change their tactics. How old is the next suicide bomber? Who knows.
I'm not being a scare-monger as I have a vested interest in preventing terrorism (as do we all). However, you can't put finely-tuned measures in place overnight so you have to use blanket measures at first.
Bear with the security; it's being done with your best interests at heart!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's high time that the blanket measures were reviewed; the fine-tuning and REAL cost effective measures are obvious to all that use the system. Nobody at the Dft wants, or is prepared, to listen.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
robo283
The risk is so minimal/non exsistent that it's worth it.
Nowhere have we EVER heard of a British family, some elderly English lady or gentleman, or some kids trying to bring down a flight, so lets not invent it.
Let us just carry on with the profiling on the "unsuitable" and see how we get on. After all they are more recogniseable than they would have liked to be, which makes our job a little easier in spotting them!
After all if resources are running thin, that's the clear and sensible option that's emerging!
The risk is so minimal/non exsistent that it's worth it.
Nowhere have we EVER heard of a British family, some elderly English lady or gentleman, or some kids trying to bring down a flight, so lets not invent it.
Let us just carry on with the profiling on the "unsuitable" and see how we get on. After all they are more recogniseable than they would have liked to be, which makes our job a little easier in spotting them!
After all if resources are running thin, that's the clear and sensible option that's emerging!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is, with the beginning of this thread, the possibility of a sensible debate over the current levels of security and what should be considered for the future.
Having had Security responsibilities in the past, dealt with the DoT and the DfT, worked with airports, airlines, service providers and been a passenger on too many occassions to remember I believe that there are some basic points to bring out:
Lockerbie, and the political knee jerk reaction following that incident is the core problem. The lack of consultation, the lack of planning and the hysterics from the people we elect to govern us meant that the industry was saddled with a system that had little joined up thinking, and even less planning and forethought as to where it was going.
Subsequent terrorist activities have led to additional, often irrational, levels being added without anyone within Government having the belief or courage to stand up and demand a reveiw.
The current system is a total mess. It is extremely costly, inefficient and generally badly managed.
My priorities for review:
1. Stop the pathetic questioning at check-in. In all my experience the only people who answer in the positive to the questions are either drunk, think they are comedians or do not have English as their first language.
2. Upgrade background checks on aviation employees so that all in the industry that are required to go airside, anywhere within the UK, are subjected to the same level of checks and have the same access. Eliminate this nonsensical situation whereby a flight crew member is deemed to be less of a threat that a senior manager from a service company but both are more of a threat than an employee of HMR&C.
3. Introduce an industry wide minimal cabin bag allowance. Stop this being an airline marketing tool and enforce it for all - passengers & flight crews - all.
4. Review and revise the 'banned' articles list. It is currently non- sensical.
5. Review and revise the parameters for passenger and cabin bag search in the light of the technology currently available.
6. Use central funding to ensure ALL airports are using the same technology. For x-ray, for passenger AMD, for ID passes etc.
Phew, got that off my chest.
Having had Security responsibilities in the past, dealt with the DoT and the DfT, worked with airports, airlines, service providers and been a passenger on too many occassions to remember I believe that there are some basic points to bring out:
Lockerbie, and the political knee jerk reaction following that incident is the core problem. The lack of consultation, the lack of planning and the hysterics from the people we elect to govern us meant that the industry was saddled with a system that had little joined up thinking, and even less planning and forethought as to where it was going.
Subsequent terrorist activities have led to additional, often irrational, levels being added without anyone within Government having the belief or courage to stand up and demand a reveiw.
The current system is a total mess. It is extremely costly, inefficient and generally badly managed.
My priorities for review:
1. Stop the pathetic questioning at check-in. In all my experience the only people who answer in the positive to the questions are either drunk, think they are comedians or do not have English as their first language.
2. Upgrade background checks on aviation employees so that all in the industry that are required to go airside, anywhere within the UK, are subjected to the same level of checks and have the same access. Eliminate this nonsensical situation whereby a flight crew member is deemed to be less of a threat that a senior manager from a service company but both are more of a threat than an employee of HMR&C.
3. Introduce an industry wide minimal cabin bag allowance. Stop this being an airline marketing tool and enforce it for all - passengers & flight crews - all.
4. Review and revise the 'banned' articles list. It is currently non- sensical.
5. Review and revise the parameters for passenger and cabin bag search in the light of the technology currently available.
6. Use central funding to ensure ALL airports are using the same technology. For x-ray, for passenger AMD, for ID passes etc.
Phew, got that off my chest.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The risk is so minimal/non exsistent that it's worth it.
Nowhere have we EVER heard of a British family, some elderly English lady or gentleman, or some kids trying to bring down a flight, so lets not invent it"
Fools Hole,
Thank you for that reality check. Just as no Special Needs teacher ever blew up an Underground train, and no middle class White Moslem convert ever tried to blow up a plane with an exploding shoe, until it happened.
I will always try to fly on your plane (assuming you are aircrew) as you are clearly the luckiest person alive and nothing bad will ever happen to you.
Just remember: In the security field, just as in aviation, complacency kills.
Nowhere have we EVER heard of a British family, some elderly English lady or gentleman, or some kids trying to bring down a flight, so lets not invent it"
Fools Hole,
Thank you for that reality check. Just as no Special Needs teacher ever blew up an Underground train, and no middle class White Moslem convert ever tried to blow up a plane with an exploding shoe, until it happened.
I will always try to fly on your plane (assuming you are aircrew) as you are clearly the luckiest person alive and nothing bad will ever happen to you.
Just remember: In the security field, just as in aviation, complacency kills.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will never forget a conversation I had about security with my (then) F.O. who was an RAF Falklands veteran. He told me, just as all the stupid post 9-11 security was getting established that it failed to amase him how our civil servants failed to make any use of the very sophisticated security experts that they had available to them whos costs we all bear. The said civil servants decided to do it themselves (which is probably why we are all suffering) and failed, I understand to ever consult our Army, Navy or Airforce security experts. Of course these civil servants had desks to drive and empires to build. Certainly true when in a budget a few years ago G. Brown stated his intention of getting rid of many members of the civil service who, in his opinion, were surplus to requirements and the savings that this would make. Since then I have read nothing in the papers of civil servants bleating about the unfairness of G. Brown's cuts! Were their golden handshakes sufficiently generous to keep them quiet? G. Brown is a Scotsman!
P.P.
P.P.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
robo283,
I don't really care whether you think I am a pilot or not!
My suggestion is purely a possible answer to an already impossible and most idiotic situation.
It's exactly the type of your paranoia that is costing us so much in "security", which sadly you and I know means nothing at all!!!
The security goons wouldn't be able to prevent a thing and if you really think they could, you are just a dreamer!
The terrorist is already a step ahead and laughing at your "bund up" thinking, which he has engineered for you.
I say again, let the obvious people go and I mean the obvious.
Selectively scan whomever you like and get the results.
Now I'm getting bored.
I don't really care whether you think I am a pilot or not!
My suggestion is purely a possible answer to an already impossible and most idiotic situation.
It's exactly the type of your paranoia that is costing us so much in "security", which sadly you and I know means nothing at all!!!
The security goons wouldn't be able to prevent a thing and if you really think they could, you are just a dreamer!
The terrorist is already a step ahead and laughing at your "bund up" thinking, which he has engineered for you.
I say again, let the obvious people go and I mean the obvious.
Selectively scan whomever you like and get the results.
Now I'm getting bored.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Car hits Glasgow Airport"
Mass police presence appears at local airport.
Concrete blocks forming road block, up to 15 police searching every car in. Small airport - one lane, not that many cars. When airport closes at 9pm, they leave.
One morning, chap in overalls pedals up on pushbike, and holds up airport ID.
"Where are you going?" asks PC
"You see the big green hangar.... I work in there."
Slight pause...
"Where are you flying out to then?"
Mass police presence appears at local airport.
Concrete blocks forming road block, up to 15 police searching every car in. Small airport - one lane, not that many cars. When airport closes at 9pm, they leave.
One morning, chap in overalls pedals up on pushbike, and holds up airport ID.
"Where are you going?" asks PC
"You see the big green hangar.... I work in there."
Slight pause...
"Where are you flying out to then?"
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From todays (London) Daily Telegraph Business Diary, (Simon Goodley):
To B.A.'s AGM at London's QE2 Centre, which is about as difficult to enter as one of B.A's aeroplanes.
First came a good probing at the front gate about my inadequate ID before being passed to another security guard who searched my baggage; "Whats this?" he asked, pulling out an orange, "It's an orange" I replied, only to see it confiscated along with an apple in return for a raffle ticket - allowing me to reclaim my lunch upon my exit.
Finally I was ushered into the AGM to hear chairman Martin Broughton in full flight, "To be effective" he opined, "security has to be credible. Current UK security requirements are no longer credible." How very true.
To B.A.'s AGM at London's QE2 Centre, which is about as difficult to enter as one of B.A's aeroplanes.
First came a good probing at the front gate about my inadequate ID before being passed to another security guard who searched my baggage; "Whats this?" he asked, pulling out an orange, "It's an orange" I replied, only to see it confiscated along with an apple in return for a raffle ticket - allowing me to reclaim my lunch upon my exit.
Finally I was ushered into the AGM to hear chairman Martin Broughton in full flight, "To be effective" he opined, "security has to be credible. Current UK security requirements are no longer credible." How very true.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What difference does it make taking the money from Central Goverment?
It means that everyone in the UK pays instead of only people (UK Resident and otherwise) who are flying.
The Airline industry don't really pay now. They have a charge on the cost of a ticket. They pay that to the airport authority, who pays for thier own security out of it and for Policing, if it is additional to the level provided to the local area. (eg Heathrow had 450 Police officers stationed there, the airport paid for them in order to have a higher level of Police than the local area, ie Uxbridge only having 150 officers for an area 10 times the size)
If central Goverment paid the costs, then the airlines would gain nothing, ticket prices would go down by a small amount, and everyones tax would go up instead.
It means that everyone in the UK pays instead of only people (UK Resident and otherwise) who are flying.
The Airline industry don't really pay now. They have a charge on the cost of a ticket. They pay that to the airport authority, who pays for thier own security out of it and for Policing, if it is additional to the level provided to the local area. (eg Heathrow had 450 Police officers stationed there, the airport paid for them in order to have a higher level of Police than the local area, ie Uxbridge only having 150 officers for an area 10 times the size)
If central Goverment paid the costs, then the airlines would gain nothing, ticket prices would go down by a small amount, and everyones tax would go up instead.
What was it, a couple of weeks ago now ?
Two separate loonies put cars full of gas cylinder bombs at Piccadilly Circus, heart of London. A few days later I was walking right past the site in Haymarket one evening. No police, all parking absolutely as normal, you would never know it had happened.
One loony puts car full of gas cylinder bombs at Glasgow Airport. Absolute panic measures by police, huge areas closed off, hundreds of police standing round with machine guns at EVERY airport in the UK.
Come on, our leaders. Why the difference ? Why pick on just the airports ?
Two separate loonies put cars full of gas cylinder bombs at Piccadilly Circus, heart of London. A few days later I was walking right past the site in Haymarket one evening. No police, all parking absolutely as normal, you would never know it had happened.
One loony puts car full of gas cylinder bombs at Glasgow Airport. Absolute panic measures by police, huge areas closed off, hundreds of police standing round with machine guns at EVERY airport in the UK.
Come on, our leaders. Why the difference ? Why pick on just the airports ?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
complete crap BJCC, as are most of your pro-security, pro-police rants.
Central government should pick up the tab, airports are a strategic part of the UK infrastructure. Either that or, if the airports (and hence the industry) have to pay for the security, then the aiports and the industry should decide on the requirements of said security.
At the moment we have the unsustainable situation whereby the DfT delegate the security requirements (why do that if its not a strategic part of the UK governement?) but don't pay for them
In my view there is some underlying 'anti-aviation' group in the UK governement and security and green-spin is being fuelled by this lobby.
I don't see metal detectors and degrading searches on the underground or nightclubs, despite the fact that almost all of UK and global terror bombings of the last decade have been on trains or in pubs/clubs. Hmmmm.
Central government should pick up the tab, airports are a strategic part of the UK infrastructure. Either that or, if the airports (and hence the industry) have to pay for the security, then the aiports and the industry should decide on the requirements of said security.
At the moment we have the unsustainable situation whereby the DfT delegate the security requirements (why do that if its not a strategic part of the UK governement?) but don't pay for them
In my view there is some underlying 'anti-aviation' group in the UK governement and security and green-spin is being fuelled by this lobby.
I don't see metal detectors and degrading searches on the underground or nightclubs, despite the fact that almost all of UK and global terror bombings of the last decade have been on trains or in pubs/clubs. Hmmmm.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AlexL
Far from being crap, it's a statement of facts. At the moment, pax pay. If Goverment foots the bill, we all pay. Nothing pro or anti security or Police in that, just economic reality. Where else do you think the money is going to come from? Just because you don't agree it doesn't make it crap.
I think you are being paraniod about anti aviation groups. Aviation brings in a great deal of cash, it is no ones interest to either price it out of the market, nor to have it collapse due to terrorst actions.
You may be right about the current situation being unsustainable, but then again, I suspect you arn't, the current restictions are from what I understand in the most part here to stay.
Before you have another rant, thats also neither pro or anti security nor police, its my opinion, based on conversations with people who know a great deal more than you, or I do about whats going on.
Far from being crap, it's a statement of facts. At the moment, pax pay. If Goverment foots the bill, we all pay. Nothing pro or anti security or Police in that, just economic reality. Where else do you think the money is going to come from? Just because you don't agree it doesn't make it crap.
I think you are being paraniod about anti aviation groups. Aviation brings in a great deal of cash, it is no ones interest to either price it out of the market, nor to have it collapse due to terrorst actions.
You may be right about the current situation being unsustainable, but then again, I suspect you arn't, the current restictions are from what I understand in the most part here to stay.
Before you have another rant, thats also neither pro or anti security nor police, its my opinion, based on conversations with people who know a great deal more than you, or I do about whats going on.