Airport Security (Merged) - Effects on Crew/Staff

[evyjet]

How ridiculous it is that I get treated like a pax when it comes to "what I have in my Nav Bag". No nail clippers, scissors etc etc. But some of you idiots think that's actually important for safety ( as opposed to keeping the public happy).

So I have no dangerous nail clippers or scissors, but I have a crash axe behind me in the flightdeck!! Get real, Like has been said before, if a Pilot really wants to do damage he can.

What next? Armed security making sure we fly safely???!!!!

[chiglet]

Piece on Radio 4......The Americans are sending us Skymarshals "to help to SECURE flghts from the UK to the US"
WHO is going to "check" said SkyMarshals? [and what is going to happen to their guns?]
watp,iktch

[Nov71]

Security can never be 100% effective. Flight crew & cc could bring down a plane in flight if they wished without bringing anything onboard but
consider coercion. Bank managers have been forced to 'assist' in bank robberies because their family was held hostage. "All you have to do Captain/Steward is put this bottle of liquid soap in the aft toilet or leave this egg sandwich in the overhead locker above row 1A." I accept, as with most movies, this is more likely with the ground cleaning/catering crew, but the risk is present.
For as long as pax restrictions apply, crew cabin luggage should be consigned to the hold, as per pax valet with only items essential for the flight operation, charts, calculator etc allowed in the cabin after airside security scrutiny. If a mobile phone is essential, an approved mobile phone could be collected from airside security. Hot/cold drinks should be obtained from the galley as should any special diet meals/snacks.
If you think about it, these meaures would protect crews from coercion but as I said Security measures can never be 100%

[LLuke]

I think that the UK goverment did a great job. They caught the bad guys, no one got hurt, no properties damaged. This is really as good as it gets. I understand the current 'security instructions' and happily accept them.

Meanwhile it is up to all goverments to create asap a situation where trust is established. Goverments and the society trust 18 year old kids (policeofficers and soldiers) to carry (machine)guns and carry out orders. We feel (*cough*) safe when we see them. It must be possible to create a situation where pilots are trusted equally. If we are trusted to fly an aircraft with pax and kerosine, we should be trusted to bring a newspaper or anything else. A thorough identity check is more then sufficient. If the guys in front are really the pilots everybody will simply have to trust them. Whether the toothpaste of the captain is real or not, is the least of all problems after the flight has departed with that captain.

Identifying pilots is difficult with so many airliners from so many countries, maybe a common special pass(port) with corresponding data in a worldwide accessable database which gives pilots authority to fly trans-atlantic or to fly in Europe or to fly national depending on A/C type, type of ops, etc.. would help goverments to trust pilots from other countries. Once all pilots are trusted, the identity check should suffice and there would be no need to examine my wallet and squeeze my balls any longer.

I know this all sounds naive, but if the society can trust an 18 year old kid with a machinegun, it must be possible for us to become trusted people.

[Johnbr]

I'm about to fly into the U.S. twice this month,the first flight on sunday...Anybody can tell me if I can take my notebook and my mobile i:* n my briefcase considering I'm not flying out of the UK?

[Two Cocks]

tis the end of aviation as we know it.

thank you i've had a pleasant ride - now to find a new job:hmm:

[coopervane]

For years now, almost every UK airport seems to do its own thing when it comes to security levels. A common standard is long overdue and maybe its time for the UK Government to take over the running of all UK airport security.

I can never understand why when going through the process of obtaining a security pass for one airport, quite often it is not accepted at another.

If they are all working to the same levels of security clearance, then it should not be a problem.

Another dual standards thing is that aircrew get to walk into almost any airport with their passes,yet other employees such as engineers have to suffer the empire building jobs worth police.

Security access to airside at any UK airport should be the same at Heathrow as it is the Shetlands. Lets have a common pass and all be batting on the same side.

The BAA have the facility in their pass system to authorise another of its airports to be accessed by individuals which is not there own.

This system could be implemented country wide. Another advantage of having a common administation is that when security alerts such as this weeks events could be co-ordinated and implemented through a centalised computer system. You only had to watch the media this week to see the differences in which each airport implemented the alert status.

Come on Mr Blair, see if you can get one thing right before you depart office!!

Coop & you are not bringing your dinner through security without eating it first Bear:ugh:

[warp factor]

I wonder what security is in place on Cruise Ships,do they have restrictions on carry on luggage?

[Ignition Override]

Welcome to the "club", even though it has gotten much worse.

Ironically, the US security directors still feel like too much metal while walking through the detector is a bad thing-therefore, most passengers still feel required to take their shoes off. Maybe this has improved in the three days since I last flew.

How about catering crews-are they still supplying trays of Pepsi, Cranapple and my favorite Mountain Dew to the planes' galleys?

Your English intelligence people, New Scotland Yard and others, did a superb job. I wonder whether US intelligence could have discovered such a plot, at least after 9-11? Our agencies supposedly share data-or at least we are led to believe this is so.

We should also all be grateful to the Pakistani police forces.

[Dream Land]

As pointed out by several posts I feel that badging for flight crew needs to be stepped up to a higher level, operating pilots should be allowed to bypass the standard passenger check point for obvious reasons pointed out several times in this thread and to free up manpower to search real potential criminals. As far as the comments about how the crew could be involved is total nonsense.

[albatross]

When will they outlaw battery powered wristwatches for crew and passengers alike?
I predict that the day will come when planeloads of completely naked passengers ( perhaps shackled to their seats ) and crew depart while towing the baggage, cargo and parents with small children and deadly baby formula in a glider or blimp streamed at a safe distance behind the aircraft.
While we will, perhaps, be moderately repulsed by all the naked flesh we will all feel safe I am sure.
You heard it here first.
( The above is an attempt at humour during these trying times and I apologise if it is not seen as such )

[Ron & Edna Johns]

The problem is, Dream Land, that this would require more manpower and resources, not less. Paid for by some one. And that is why it doesn't happen now and I fear won't happen in the future.

It is why, as of today, I am examining other careers. Not going to live my life this way for the next 15-20 years. Life's too short.

[Aeropig1]

I know this all sounds naive, but if the society can trust an 18 year old kid with a machinegun, it must be possible for us to become trusted people.

Following some emails I recieved and the post fron Lluke my last post on this - promise.


Consider this, Your wife/girlfreind/child/parents are held at gunpoint and because you are 'trusted' and not searched the demand is made that you carry the container airside where 'someone' will take it from you. If you do not do it or you tell anybody the hostage will be killed if you do they are released (these people will release them to make sure the tactic works). There is a high likelyhood that there demands will be complied with. It is an old tactic and has been used to great effect in NI in the past and by a number of groups since. As Nov points out no one is immune.

One way to combat this threat is to search and apply the measures to all staff and that includes crew. It is the most effective preventative measure. It is V. unlikely that this will be tried when the item is not likely to get through. And the fact is for this method the crew are the constant a lot of people know what you do and the regularity at which you do it.

[Basil]

I am sure that this thread is being closely followed by those planning the next strike.
Professionals contributing current procedures are not doing us any favours.
Leave it to the amateur talking heads and don't get drawn into revealing useful information.

Edited to say that this posting is a generalisation and not aimed at anyone in particular :ok:

[flt_lt_w_mitty]

Aeropig-Consider this, Your wife/girlfreind/child/parents are held at gunpoint and because you are 'trusted' and not searched the demand is made that you carry the container airside where 'someone' will take it from you. If you do not do it or you tell anybody the hostage will be killed if you do they are released (these people will release them to make sure the tactic works). There is a high likelyhood that there demands will be complied with. It is an old tactic and has been used to great effect in NI in the past and by a number of groups since. As Nov points out no one is immune.- unfortunately this oft-quoted 'excuse' allows Police, Security staff, and Customs/Immigration to pass unchecked, and sometimes with weapons. Convince me they are immune.

[Sunfish]

Aeropig, the scenario more likely is that your terrorist will purchase a "loaded" McDonalds Hamburger and drink after going through security. Or a loaded Burberry Hat, or a carton of cigarettes, or a brand new camcorder.

It's the end of duty free shopping as we know it.

[Big Tudor]

I passed through LGW yesterday on my way home. From what I saw no-one was immune. All hand baggage was checked in, unfortunately not all hand baggage arrived at the destination. Everyone was subjected to the same rules and screening. And do I have a problem with it. Not a jot. I arrived safely at my destination, albeit a bit late, and can now spend the weekend with my family. Hats off to all the airport staff in LGW (and all other airports) who are doing a magnificent job in the circumstances. If all of these measures keep aviation a safe mode of transport then I really don't care whether I can take anything on board or not. One positive side effect is it is a lot quicker to board and disembark without hand baggage! :ok:

[BEagle]

This is the age.......

......of the train.

I am simply not prepared to put up withe the current airline hand luggage restrictions as the norm 'for the forseeable future'. Entrust car keys, mobile phone, personal organiser, laptop etc to baggage crunchers? Nope - I don't think so.

And I suspect that many more people who travel frequently will be thinking the same unless airlines come up with something more acceptable to their business travellers.

I reckon that companies will start seriously reviewing their travel policies if the current restrictions are still in place in a month's time. Airline bosses need to impress this on the government - or you aircrew won't have a job any longer.

[scroggs]

Aeropig, the scenario more likely is that your terrorist will purchase a "loaded" McDonalds Hamburger and drink after going through security. Or a loaded Burberry Hat, or a carton of cigarettes, or a brand new camcorder.
It's the end of duty free shopping as we know it.

Duty-free on arrival? Now there's a novel and intelligent concept!

[lexxity]

According to Auntie this morning "Airlines are looking into an abyss of empty seats for this winter" so that's encouraging isn't it?

BEagle I'm sure that the airlines hear and would love to react to your point, but I'm equally sure that their hands are tied by rules and regulations beyond their controls.

[Final 3 Greens]

Lexx

Whether airlines can or cannot react, BEagle is right in his analysis and it won't be the politicians, mandarins and officials who pay with their jobs.

Time for your industry to apply some very strong pressure on behalf of the pax and employees or it could be a bleak winter season.

Don't forget that interest rates have just risen and debt levels are higher than ever.

the airlines could well be squeezed from both the premium and non premium end.

The BBC maybe over cooking the situation, but what are you and your colleagues going to do about protecting your business?

I kow what I am doing to protect mine; I am avoiding connecting via London, so that I can be sure that my laptop, backup files on memory sticks and mobile (which are absolutely essential to my work) will stay safely with me throughout the journey.

This may not help you and your colleagues, but then I am not particularly worried about your work, whereas I am about mine.

Sorry to be blunt, but that's the way it is.

When I can carry my laptop on board, I'll start connecting via London once again.

[Rivet gun]

Aeropig-- unfortunately this oft-quoted 'excuse' allows Police, Security staff, and Customs/Immigration to pass unchecked, and sometimes with weapons. Convince me they are immune.


If you were an islamic terrorist what would be your favorite career chioce? Probably it would be airport security, police, customs or immigration. Your career aspirations would be enhanced by the fact that several of these services are activly trying to recruit a greater proportion of people from ethnic minorities.

[crew the screw]

Watch the pages of this Forum site fill up with 'Aircraft diverted' due to indications on smoke/fire in the hold due to the fact that the holds are stuffed full of Mobile phones...

:ugh: :D :ok: :mad:

[Human Factor]

When I can carry my laptop on board, I'll start connecting via London once again.

F3G,

Sadly, I feel many hundreds of thousands will agree with you.

[BEagle]

Indeed, F3G!

But it's not just London, it's any UK airport at the moment.

I'm currently looking at travelling by other means to Brussels or Dusseldorf, then flying normally. Until, that is, I am allowed to take my laptop, mobile phone, personal organiser and car keys on board. I don't mind putting them in a transparent brief case and having them stowed in a locked overhead bin, but I am not prepared to risk their loss, damage or theft in hold baggage.

I've had my hold luggage delayed by airlines at least twice in the last year. Had my laptop, business documents, phone and car keys been in the luggage.......

[Final 3 Greens]

Stepclimb

Firstly my congratulations on getting your TP job, I realise that it equates to many hours of training, study and a big personal financial commitment, which I deeply respect. I hope that you are enjoying the new challenge.

You comments are well made, I guess that I view this current situation as a trigger or accelerator, that could make things worse than they need to be.

[Fokkerwokker]

Given all this it wouldn't surprise me to see major corporations/companies revisit light aviation for inter-European travel.

Don't let anymore small airfields close fer crissakes!

[Danny]

As was pointed out to Aeropig, what is there to stop the families of airport police, customs officers or even the screeners themselves from being held hostage and forcing the police, customs or screeners to carry through something? Nothing!

You made a point about the current fight against terrorism being intelligence led and it would appear that the latest coup was a result of that. However, at the same time you agree that the present situation that, whilst very restrictive for pax, some of the stupidity and ill thought through ideas being applied to pilots show that what we are witnessing and experiencing is the typical knee-jerk, shut the stable door after the horse has bolted scenario that is so typical these days. If, as you rightly pointed out, the liquid bomb/components scenario has already been successfully tried on the Phillipines Airlines B747 in the 90's, why have they only now decided to stop us carrying anything on board as hand baggage? Are you so sure that the really dedicated terrorists are not prepared to put anything in their body cavities? If, as you say and has already been demonstrated on the news, the amount of liquid explosive required will fit into a 35mm film container, I'm sure that it wouldn't be too uncomfortable for someone to smuggle it on board, whether as a pax, crew, police, customs or screener.

So, either you use proper 'intelligence' led profiling which is designed to see if the person is indeed being held hostage through his or her family or you go for the biggest screw-up in 'intelligence' led security screening that we have witnessed so far. Damage the industry to the point that the most often heard argument against intelligent profiling is that it is too expensive and too disruptive. Duh!

I am now off to try and catch a flight to London to get to work. I'll be in uniform and somehow I have to trust that my flight case will fit inside my suitcase and that neither get lost. It would be a sham if I arrived at my destination and I didn't have my passport or licence or spare glasses.

[drichard]

Pardon a humble PAX for gatecrashing the flightdeck, but there are many PAX considering the same questions in their own forum, especially IN "Uk Airport Chaos (hand wringing thread) ".

There are questions regarding:


Laptop security
X-ray machines
Purchases Airside/duty free
Security screening of flight deck and cc
Integrity of airside staff (at stores) and delivery of supplies to said stores
Security in europe vs uk (i.e. is it better to route via a european hub to the USA, getting to the hub via surface transport) - thinking about the safety of laptops etc


Is there anyone from the pointy end/security available and able to shed a light on any of the questions raised?

I feel many of you are justifyably concerned regarding the durability of airlines to survive the current scare. Certainly within europe, there are fast regional surface links and PAX will vote with their bums as to how they will travel - if flying is a PITA, they will endure a slightly longer surface journey.
As to travelling across the pond, flying is the only option if time is of the essence, but otherwise, cruising might be about to come back big time (no jet lag, good food, no baggage allowances to talk of, leg room is not an issue (DVT scares etc). It's about 90hrs by boat to NY - given the way security is changing, it'll soon be quicker to sail than fly:E

Most PAX have a great deal of respect for those who fly for a living and ensure the safety of those flying especially in these troubled times.

Constructive comments please.

[Final 3 Greens]

Crew the Screw

I defer to your greater experience!

To be fair, the checked baggage system is a compromise to deliver a high volume throughput.

Sensible pax buy travel insurance and the occasional breakage is part of the game.

The problem arises when you put laptops into baggage, since the physical machine can be repèlaced, but the temporary lack of access to the data and functionality is the showstopper.

Danny

I agree completey with your comments about profiling.

[Globaliser]

As was pointed out to Aeropig, what is there to stop the families of airport police, customs officers or even the screeners themselves from being held hostage and forcing the police, customs or screeners to carry through something? Nothing!What about impersonation of aircrew? How difficult would it be for security to detect that, particularly at busy airports where they come in all different shapes, colours and sizes? I know that some places have dedicated crew arrangements, and crew often go through as a group for a single flight, which would make it more difficult for an individual to carry out a successful impersonation. But what about the airports where aircrew clear security through the same points as pax?

[scroggs]

The problem to be overcome is that of establishing identity beyond doubt. Once that is achieved (and some method of doing so must be found), then most other restrictions for crew could be lifted. Until identity is beyond doubt, at mixed pax/crew security points there will continue to be problems. However, at crew-only security points (as at LHR and LGW for based crew) a more intelligent, co-operative policy would not go amiss.

[Khaosai]

Hi Danny,

might be an idea to take your licence passport and glasses in the clear plastig bag provided, then at least you can go on your flight if your suitcase becomes lost.

Rgds.

[flaps40]

I wonder if the readers of Pprune can help me. I am an airline training Captain with 11000 hours of experience and a very BBC voice. I probably do not look very much like a suspicious person, don't even have a moustache. I really try to do a lovely professional job for my company and the delightful european travelling public. However I encountered extreme stress on Thursday last when the security staff at my cosy BAA airport searched my bags with such zeal that not even a single teabag nor my chocolate biscuits (which I always share with the crew) survived.
I resorted to desperate measure the following day when I have to confess I took great delight is smuggling some illicit confectionery (mostly successfully, although a couple of biscuits were cracked in their hiding places!) and a teabag carried in an unusual place, too!
Should I file a CAA MOR to confess to this sin? Or should I keep my mouth shut? I am beginning to have a little trouble recalling whether or not the aircrew and security staff are in fact 'all on the same side' or are instead 'them-and-us'.
Finally, i drink darjeeling tea, but am toying with the idea of gunpowder tea instead. is this illegal? you help appreciated

[Dream Land]

What about impersonation of aircrew? How difficult would it be for security to detect that, particularly at busy airports where they come in all different shapes, colours and sizes? I know that some places have dedicated crew arrangements, and crew often go through as a group for a single flight, which would make it more difficult for an individual to carry out a successful impersonation. But what about the airports where aircrew clear security through the same points as pax? by Globaliser At airports where crew and pax use the same security check point I think it is very easy to do, the emphasis being the security check, not the ID check, so the crew operating the flight is standing around in their socks while someone that works at Burger King airside walks right through with a local pass. :*

[Oh that's super!]

How about a special crew channel, with registered retina and fingerprint scans? Hard to fake that. Being an imposter won't work.

However, that won't stop the bloody terrorists from actually training and becoming an airline pilot.

Those damn terrorists... they genuinely disgust me.

[Ranger1]

Flaps40
Sorry it is not politically correct to say you have a BBC voice! The BBC now hire those with regional accents so we can all learn to massacre the English language, whatever that is these days! Actually I think it is now called American English!
Joking aside they at least still seem happy enough to let us carry around the biggest bomb of all! The B***** aeroplane! But I am afraid your tea bags and biscuits are still a security risk even more so than that fire axe it appears!

[Capt H Peacock]

Danny, as I’m sure you agree, the argument about kidnapping loved ones to force the pilots to carry something through is completely illogical.

What if the terrorists simply instruct the pilot to crash the plane? What then? Ban us from the flightdeck altogether?

This fatuous argument is usually used by those who cannot reasonably justify the procedures that are forced upon us, and to rebuff anyone who refuses to be put off by ‘It’s security, there is no discussion’.

We deserve better than this.

[Paradise Lost]

After reading 15 pages of repetitious comments, may I respectfully suggest the following alternative employment;
1. Join Netjets Europe
2. Manufacture Clear plastic Bags
3. Sell Travel Insurance
4. Learn to Drive a train or a ferry.

We are all employed as professional aircrew for our flexibility, adaptability and ability to work under pressure.
There doesn't appear to be much flexibility or adaptability being shown in many of the above posts.

[brakedwell]

After reading 15 pages of repetitious comments, may I respectfully suggest the following alternative employment;
1. Join Netjets Europe
2. Manufacture Clear plastic Bags
3. Sell Travel Insurance
4. Learn to Drive a train or a ferry.
We are all employed as professional aircrew for our flexibility, adaptability and ability to work under pressure.
There doesn't appear to be much flexibility or adaptability being shown in many of the above posts.
Forget the travel insurance - they won't pay up.

[Vizzo]

One fine day a pilot gets told by security he can't bring his bottle of water and his leatherman knife.
In a parallel universe, the same pilot brings his knife and water and take's his plane flying. After he's finished his orange (the only healthy crew food on board) he put's his knife away and take's a swig of water. He then takes the crash axe from behind his seat, swings it and takes his colleagues head clean off. Cabin crew are unable to do anything as there is a bulletproof door in the way. Next thing he disconnects the autopilot and crashes the plane with 10000 litres of explosive jet fuel into a building.
Dear mister security man, tell me again, why can't I bring my water and my knife? I honestly don't understand...
Good night



Obviously, a group of terrorist pax can spread themselves over many planes. I would imagine after 9/11 pilot vetting is pretty manic. God knows though how they will handle stopping certain people from going into FO training though. Security nightmare.

Intelligence leading to prevention is certainly the most important factor in this but we will also be entering the age of much, much earlier check-in for pax and crew alike.

I would also hope there is a saturation of our old friends the sniffer dogs at all the airports. Those little babies get my award for security excellence!

[Human Factor]

Hi Danny,

might be an idea to take your licence passport and glasses in the clear plastig bag provided, then at least you can go on your flight if your suitcase becomes lost.

Rgds.

I would suggest the opposite. Should a pilot's suitcase/flight bag go missing in the hold whilst containing his licence, passport and glasses, he won't be able to operate his next service. When this starts happening regularly, it'll start to make the point to the Department for Transport that this security policy is unworkable for flight crew. Some airlines are already aware of the problems and are in discussions with the DfT to find a solution. Sadly so far, the DfT people are behaving as we have come to expect of a bunch who have no understanding of day to day airline operations.

[rumpelstiltskin]

Oh dear, oh dear, Manchester, maybe the world's most crew unfriendly airport, are now stopping crews from carrying flight bags/ crew bags through security !!! and yes, you will only be allowed 1 pen ?? yes 1 pen, how 3 pens are more dangerous than 1 pen is beyond me but hey, this is Manchester, and they don't know what's in them apparently ?????

now i,m all for top security but for god's sake some common sense !:rolleyes:

[teamilk&sugar]

I am in fact going to drain my entire body of all fluids tonight before I attempt to get through Man's security....it may make a bit of a mess on the carpet, but hey...

[RAT 5]

Rumple: What do you mean "through security"? It has been stated, at some airports, that crews can take crew bags/flight bags through crew security on duty. No liquids. (why not if they are tested by the pilot? If it's OK for baby's milk to be drunk as a test, why not crew drinks? Has BALPA been consulted on any of this?) However, if passing through pax security, even if on duty at that airport, they are subject to the same rules as pax.

[Stampe]

Well I trust you are calmly returning to your crew room. Funny how the aircraft don,t seem to fly without pilots.

"Current guidance for operating crew is:-
Crew accessing the Restricted Zone through staff search areas must carry only the items they require to perform their duties (including personal hand baggage meeting that description). All such items must be x-rayed where possible and hand searched where not. All crew must be hand searched."

Notice this is loosely worded to allow discretion with the exception of fluids.

[rumpelstiltskin]

Ahh yes Rat, you are right, through pax security since at Manchester the 'crew' channel closes at night, what ? airports are 24 hr ? nooooooo, so given that the crews need to go through the pax channels they are being treated as pax ! well, i'd just love to sit in the back with a G and T.

unbelievable

[390cruise]

It would be better if all fluids were drained from Manchester security staff.

[scroggs]

Would those who wish to discuss the effects of the current crisis on passengers please direct their comments to this (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238387) thread in 'Pax & SLF'. Please leave the thread in 'R&N' for the discussion of the situation as it affects operating crew.

Scroggs

[transitionlevel]

at my airport where crew and pax share the same security channel, the airport have partitioned one of the metal detection arches and x-ray machines off and are only letting flight crew through. we are being allowed to take normal items through the checkpoint (all flight deck equipment), including hold baggage, although we still have to take shoes etc off.

Why cant every airport use this system. I must admit, common sense really isnt the norm at this airport but they must have got a bang to the head or something.

[Oh that's super!]

I hope this is allowed in this thread, because this post is not about being an SLF, although it's not about being an operating crew member.

I'd like to know what happens to those who are going as supernumery (or even pax) for the purpose of conducting in-flight audits. We tend to carry books (manuals), audit sheets, pens and something to rest the paper on. As auditors do not normally travel as part of the operating crew, does it mean we'll have to audit from our brain!?

[blue up]

Just got back to EG** from LE** after an early morning flight. Whilst standing like a row of nice little ducks with our shoes off, waiting patiently for somebody to pat us down, I saw a member of non-uniformed security staff come past the "Ping" machine (what is it called?) and set off the pinger. He then carried on and went over to his desk without being checked by any other members of staff.

Kinda defeats the object of having security staff if they openly flout the rules. I noticed that he made zero attempt to take his shoes off!

I imagine the Scrimshaw will be writing another episode of his story in the next BALPA "Log":E

PS The bagage loaders have a drinks dispenser airside.:rolleyes:

[chandlers dad]

Lets not forget that many of us commute to our jobs AS PASSENGERS on these airlines!

In 10 days I fly on BA from the states to Heathrow AS A PASSENGER, then after landing put the bars on my shoulders, put my cap on my head and only then become one of the pilots. If I land in the UK and both of my bags are not there then I cannot continue my journey as the tools of my trade are not with me. Normally I take enough to make it for one day "on the road" with me in my carry-on case, hoping that if my other bag is lost that it will be found in 24 hours.

Under the current regulations I am not supposed to carry my pilots license, medical or spare glasses with me in the cabin. Right now we are being told we can carry one pair of glasses, passport and airline ticket in a plastic bag, thats it. To tell the truth the license and medical will not ever leave my person but the powers that be do not need to know that.

Now we are looking at "deadheading" in uniform as its the only way to guarantee that we will arrive with at least one set of flying clothes on our body, but thats the last thing that I want to do on my time off, parading around in uniform.

If there was any other way to get our plane, which we pick up at Luton, it would be going through somewhere other than Heathrow after the way they are acting right now. This is effecting flight crew in their job and as well as passengers.

[Final 3 Greens]

Chandler's Dad

We may have slightly crossed swords last night :) but I would like to say that I completely sympathise with the siutation that you are facing.

It is ludicrous that you cannot carry your licence and spare glasses with you and having to travel in uniform is not good news.

[Oh that's super!]

I do feel that pilot licence and medical cert should never have to be checked in. If authorities are concerned about security, then the most secure place for them to be is on the pilot's person. Considering there aren't that many pilots around, it won't be too much of an imposition to manually check through (i.e. flick through) the 'book' to make sure it has nothing sinister hiding in there.

Whereas, putting it in the hold could well cause more danger - by risking it to be stolen and possibly misused etc.

To make pilots check those in (even when they're paxing) is not in line with a sensible security precaution.

[chandlers dad]

Final,

Not a problem, lets work together to figure out a way around this mess.

Just checked with BA and we are being told that we are allowed to bring onboard "documents necessary to this flight" only and if I get some jerk at security, a pilots license and medical is not needed and I risk losing the documents.

Lets see, I land in the UK and one or all of my checked bags are missing. One day later its delivered to my hotel, and after opening it I find that my "professional" wallet is missing, among other items. Gone are my Bermuda, Danish, German and FAA ATP licenses, along with my engineers (A&P) license, medical certs (EMT/Paramedic) and all shot records along with my flight crew ID, which is not required to be a passenger on the flight.

Now someone has all of my licenses, ID card and a pilots uniform. Does anyone else see a problem with this? The FAA ATP does not have a photo on it, nor does the medical, so anyone can take these two things, put my uniform on and for the most part look like a professional pilot. Its not hard to change the photo on most crew ID's, so clip one of these on and the image is complete.

Now if they can remember for a while what V1, V2 and VR, along with the emergency xponder code is, they might pass for a pilot if the person asking is the typical security guard.

Pilots traveling on airlines as passengers will become a problem in this situation if they are not allowed some leeway on what they can bring in the cabin. All its going to take is one missing checked bag full of crew items and a call to the press and this will blow wide open. Am flying in 10 days and hope all my things make it ok.

CD

[Arkroyal]

This is such complete and utter bolleaux I find it difficult to believe.
When I return to work tomorrow, I expect to be able to carry my lunch aboard.

If I can't - I'll go home.The world has lost all reason and common sense.

Hell, if I want do crash the bloody plane, I just use the stick.

[Oh that's super!]

What happens with those airlines that don't provide crew meals?
Would they be able to carry their lunch aboard?

[Arkroyal]

I work for one such. Am I supposed to live off sandwiches for the forseeable future?

It is ludicrous that you cannot carry your licence and spare glasses with you It is a condition of my license that I do, so I cannot fly without them.

I say again: Utter bolleaux.

[fireflybob]

In any other industry we would all be out on strike by now!

Although a pilot I am currently employed in the railway industry and a member of the RMT union. I am sure that if members of the RMT were not able to go to work with essential items (such as food!), an immediate walkout would be on the cards!

Whilst realising that the airlines are going through a tough time and that most crew are bending over backwards to keep the show on the road, maybe it's time to show some "moral courage" !

[LD Max]

In any other industry we would all be out on strike by now!
Although a pilot I am currently employed in the railway industry and a member of the RMT union. I am sure that if members of the RMT were not able to go to work with essential items (such as food!), an immediate walkout would be on the cards!
Whilst realising that the airlines are going through a tough time and that most crew are bending over backwards to keep the show on the road, maybe it's time to show some "moral courage" !

Of some interest - not only for it's content but for the speed of publication - is this extremely detailed item appearing on wikipedia regarding the current situation. Where do they get their information (and authors) from??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot

In the section under "Hand Luggage Restrictions" is the following passage:
It was suggested in The Times that the restrictions on hand baggage will be "enforced pending a decision from the National Aviation Security Committee following which they may be made permanent. This was confirmed by the Minister of Transport on BBC News. Travel agencies raise concern that maintaining such severe restrictions will greatly decrease interest in air transportation, especially among business class customers.

Concern is not just amongst travel agencies is it! What about us Aircrew? What about the Airlines? What about the Unions?

What representations are we (collectively) going to make this "National Aviation Security Committee" (which I personally have never heard of) to end this madness and ensure it does NOT become a permanent feature.

[Edit] Ok, I've found out who the "National Aviation Security Committee" are. Part of the DFT "Transec".
Info from the DFT website includes:

Changes were made in early 2004 to the terms of reference and composition of the National Aviation Security Committee (NASC). Representatives were drawn from more senior figures in the aviation industry, for example board members with a responsibility for security, senior figures across government at Director level, senior trade union representatives, and senior management from TRANSEC. This has provided a genuine opportunity for Government and industry to engage at a strategic level on aviation security issues, and offers a means of gaining assurance that the National Aviation Security Programme is providing the most appropriate level of security for the industry, and that the different parts of Government engaged in security are working productively together and with industry.

If board members of NASC include senior members of the aviation industry and senior trade union reps, who are they, and where are they now?

[chandlers dad]

Of some interest - not only for it's content but for the speed of publication - is this extremely detailed item appearing on wikipedia regarding the current situation. Where do they get their information (and authors) from??


Wiki comes from you and me. Anyone can post info there. Go to the page you posted then up top look and you will see a tab called "history."

Its here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2006_transatlantic_aircraft_terrorist_plot&action=history

Now the one thing that we all need to realize is that since "anyone" can post there, that its accuracy is always suspect. Also, anyone can register as anyone they like, after setting up a email account. There may be more secure and better sources of information. What is on Wiki may be accurate or it could be wild speculation. You just do not know...

[LD Max]

Its here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2006_transatlantic_aircraft_terrorist_plot&action=history
What is on Wiki may be accurate or it could be wild speculation. You just do not know...

Ah, I didn't know. I'm not overtly familliar with it. Thanks for that. But it doesn't change the message. I think we're all pretty agreed on here that what is happening is OTT. If the media reports are true that this may become a permanent feature, then I believe we need direct action now.

How we go about it is beyond me. Isn't this what we have BALPA and the other pilot unions for? Any BALPA reps out there who can tell us what to do now? I'm a BALPA (associate) member but a very small fish in a very big pond.

[Edit] See my edit of my previous post regarding NASC.

[Easy Glider]

This question is for pilots operating out of LGW or LHR over the lsat couple of days.

What exactly are these jokers in so called security trying to take off us before operating a flight?

Are we allowed our flight bags? calculators? mobile phones etc etc etc?

What about food? I always take my own. Can't stand the slop served on board. Will they try and take that too?

I am operating out of LGW tomorrow so any info would be much appreciated.

[scroggs]

Scroggs

This will impact crews if it goes on for much longer.



I think we operating crew have sufficient intelligence to understand the impact on our companies' bottom lines that these measures are having and will have if they are maintained. Nevertheless, the issues for operating crew are different than those for passengers, and it is not helpful to confuse the two. Hence the request.


For clarification, I refer you to Danny's (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2770692&postcount=158) post on the subject. In particular, this (the first) sentence: "Once again, I reiterate... this thread is about how this all affects us as aircrew. We already know about the effects on passengers and there is no need to discuss that on this thread. If you do then you will be wasting your time as the posts will be deleted and/or moved to similar threads that do relate the effect on pax."

If that's not sufficiently clear, his next post says: "Let's see how long before someone posts the question about where their posts have gone. I'm really in the mood for a banning at the moment".

Are we getting the message yet?

Scroggs

[eidah]

What happens with those airlines that don't provide crew meals?
Would they be able to carry their lunch aboard?


Yes they are able to carry there only food aboard the aircraft however it cant be in liquid form such as a yogurt would be confiscated. Deodrants and aftershaves also confiscated so the pax are going to have to put up with smelly crew. Water cant be carried through the security point however an empty bottle can be then you can fill it up once past security. Also cigarrettes and lighters cant be carried through security, however wh smith's are still selling both on airside.:ok:

[chandlers dad]

You are correct that all flight crew should be contacting their representatives now. Both your union reps as well as emails to your chief pilot, safety officer, all of your govt and local elected representatives and even AOPA.

The more people who realize that one, the flight crew should be working WITH security and not viewed as a possible terrorist, and two, that we have had complete and total control of their lives for many years while flying the planes and not abused that relationship, so keeping us from carrying tools necessary to do our job into the cockpit, as well as food to keep us nourished during the journey ARE A MINIMUM. Keeping the flight crew from having nail clippers or a nail file is stupid, when they are then locked behind the cockpit door and have a crash axe right behind their seats.

Regarding Wiki, the information there may be leaked by someone who cannot say something in the open, and thus excellent information, but on the other hand it could be pure speculation like the nutcase who says that no airplanes ever hit the WTC during 9/11 and that its all a govt plot. Without vetting it no one knows. Its a good place to start for many things but is not nor should not be the ultimate authority as long as anyone is allowed to post there.

[Loose rivets]

So, these are all the gripes, but what are you going to do?


In my last post, I suggested an urgent need for changes, but ‘one step at a time...go with the flow for the moment.' BUT, where I read of blatant foolishness, like being parted from your licence and uniform, then total refusal of these ‘orders' is called for.

Again, it will be our beleaguered employers that will be hit, but some things go over the mark.

As of today, there should be a hot-line made available to a government official, the number issued to licenced aircrew. Any madness like allowing a complete hijacking kit to be in the hold, has to be stopped immediately. No nonsense about calling 9-5 five days a week. Such is the emergency, that the government should be taking care of the crew's concerns...NOW. 24-7 .

We are faced with a crisis that will bring the industry to its knees, or worse. Even now, I doubt that the seriousness is really being accepted. ‘It will all calm down...always has in the past' mentality. No it won't, aviation as we know it will be destroyed from within, by ill qualified people grabbing at the reins.


NB I do not under-value the engineers situation. I was born an engineer. The madness of their treatment was a subject of a long post years ago and their frustrations must be as great as the pilot's, but this thread is primarily about aircrew getting to their place of work, whit the tools of the trade.

[Easy Glider]

This question is for pilots operating out of LGW or LHR over the last couole of days.

What exactly are these GUYS in security trying to take away from us before being allowed to operate a flight?

Are we allowed our fligth bags? calculators? mobile phones? keys etc etc etc?

What about food? I always take my own as I can't stand the slop served on board. Will they try and take that too?

I am operating out of LGW tomorrow so any feed back would be useful

[NG_Kaptain]

What are they taking away from us?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This question is for pilots operating out of LGW or LHR over the last couole of days.
What exactly are these GUYS in security trying to take away from us before being allowed to operate a flight?
Are we allowed our fligth bags? calculators? mobile phones? keys etc etc etc?
What about food? I always take my own as I can't stand the slop served on board. Will they try and take that too?
I am operating out of LGW tomorrow so any feed back would be useful
We go through a dedicated crew security checkpoint and are dropped off at the aircraft by bus. The EGLL security staff have been cordial and understanding to our crews, the restrictions on us are for food and liquids, we have been allowed our nav bags, laptops and any other items we normally carry on flights. I'm coming over tomorrow so will see for myself but the above was told to me by a collegue who left LHR on thursday.

[Greek God]

This is a highly emotive subject which resurrects each time there is an incident of sorts. What frustrates me is the lack of direction and consistency with regard to crew and yes I am afraid I do consider myself to be different to a passenger. When I say me I mean Flight Crew - pilots, cabin crew, engineers. Security generally consists of several layers or levels all aiming to target (sorry poor choice of vocab) different threats. In fact you could easily apply James Reason's swiss cheese model to it. To become crew you have to pass many and varied levels of security in the process of becoming qualified. A passenger - zilch, zero, all he needs is photographic id period - if international, a passport of sorts. As a passenger it is easy to organise being on the same flight as someone else but to organise a whole crew of choice. Why not have crew prosessed through security as a whole crew with flight paperwork etc. Sorry I digress and will not regurgitate all of the points made before but:
Why is there not a common national policy applied to the processing of crew at all UK airports?
The problem is not going to away; it needs sorting & above all there needs to be some consistency with an acceptence of the authority and responsibility we have as Flight Crew.

[fyrefli]

Stringent security searches which have led to long delays and cancellations at Heathrow are not sustainable, airport operator BAA has warned.

The airport cancelled a third of flights on Saturday evening in a bid to speed its return to a normal schedule.

Tony Douglas, BAA's chief executive officer for Heathrow, said: "Quite simply I don't know how long it's likely to go on, but it's clearly a set of measures that are unprecedented and by virtue of what they've come in to enforce, they're not sustainable measures."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/4787161.stm

Cheers,

Rich.

[chandlers dad]

Go one step futher and make it one procedure for all flight crews worldwide.

As you get your medical renewed your send a copy and are given an ID from that? No current first class medical and no ID?

How can this be made to work but the above is correct, we need to do something and make it stick, if not only for the UK but would be nice to have something worldwide.

[LD Max]

Given the rising concern expressed among Flight Crew and Aviation Professionals regarding the excessive and unneccessary Security Clampdown at British Airports, I would like to propose that the PPRuNe administrators open a POLL on taking Industrial Action over this issue.

If, as I suspect, there appears to be a majority in favour of doing so, this should provide some collective incentive to contact our union reps forthwith.

On the other hand, if we find little support for industrial action, it should help us all take a proportionate view of the situation.

The justification for industrial action should be obvious:

The provisions of the Security Clampdown in the UK which have been imposed on Airlines and their Crews are of such draconian severity, that they not only obstruct members in exercising their responsibilities in the course of their contractual obligations, but are begining to compromise operational safety.

Furthermore, the effect of these security measures on the traveling public is to severely restrict the freedoms and economics of travel to such an extent that they are jeopardising the economic security of the airlines and members' jobs in the longer term.

Industrial action is called for until such time as proportionate security measures are introduced for the traveling public, to enable the reinstatement of Carry-On luggage including Laptops, Phones, Reading matter, Personal hygene, adequate refreshment and other essential portable items or equipment which may be reasonably used in the course of business or leisure during the flight. Crews should be subject to dedicated security screening appropriate to their professional needs.

(Re-word as necessary)

[hotmetal]

supported by me if this isn't sorted soon.

[DonLeslie]

...Why is there not a common national policy applied to the processing of crew at all UK airports?
The problem is not going to away; it needs sorting & above all there needs to be some consistency with an acceptence of the authority and responsibility we have as Flight Crew.
Very true!

In our modern times, it should be possible to introduce a standardized patch for pilots of all european airlines. By "standardized" I mean a chip with a standardized set of data including a digital picture on it. Customize the patch with whichever airline logo you want, but the chip should be machine-readable at all european airports. That way securitypersonel could make shure in an instant that the person wanting to pass is indeed Cpt Smith of British Airways or FO Mueller of Lufthansa and not some terrorist impersonating either one. Verify idendity and be done with it! That's all there's to it and life would be a whole lot easier for us all.

I've asked my company's security department several times, why such a patch could not be introduced. Guess what the answer was:
politics :ugh::ugh::ugh:

DL

[ZBMAN]

Spot on, LD Max, count me in!

[GreatCircle]

I am sure for all of us with ALPA here in Canada, we support from afar. I was subjected to it all at LGW...nightmare.

The operational safety aspect seems to have been missed by the mandarins in CAA and DoT ivory towers...and the traveling public who help pay the wages of us all won't be tolerant for very long.

As an example....the train service between Toronto and Montreal is pretty slothful, but guess what ? These past 2 days it's been jam packed...

[LD Max]

So, these are all the gripes, but what are you going to do?
We are faced with a crisis that will bring the industry to its knees, or worse. Even now, I doubt that the seriousness is really being accepted. ‘It will all calm down...always has in the past' mentality. No it won't, aviation as we know it will be destroyed from within, by ill qualified people grabbing at the reins.

Well said Loose Rivets. :D

May I invite all respected contributors to this thread to voice their opinions on industrial action in this new thread I've started HERE. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238754)

Hopefully the administrators will open this up as a proper "Poll".

[Human Factor]

Bring on the poll.

In the meantime, I'd start investing your spare cash in Eurotunnel for when we all go under. Mostly I blame Al Q but a large portion is reserved for those unthinking muppets in the Department for Transport.

[alosaurus]

There is a place for Industrial Action and this is not it!
We are are the highest state of security for a reason ...the reason is a suspected attack is still imminent (according to the US sources several of these headcases are still on the run... probably with materials to carry out an attack).
A week of PAX inconvenience is not going to have a 9/11 effect on our job security...another large scale attack on aviation will.
You want to give pax their mobile phones (which they can't use) back...these were a critical part of the detonator. Yes it probably is OTT at the moment...but these restrictions were agreed months ago by cross section committees. They won't reverse them because pilots spit their dummies out.They will downgrade when enough information is available to do so without compromising safety. If there is any doubt there is no doubt.

[hotmetal]

There is a place for Industrial Action and this is not it!
You want to give pax their mobile phones (which they can't use) back...these were a critical part of the detonator.
Well clearly people here are talking about pilots.Like me trotting around the country for 4 days with no toothpaste/shaving gel/piles cream etc. Problems concerning passengers are not my immediate concern just now.

[Human Factor]

You want to give pax their mobile phones (which they can't use) back...these were a critical part of the detonator. Yes it probably is OTT at the moment...but these restrictions were agreed months ago by cross section committees.

No.

I don't want to give pax their mobile phones.

I want to be able to get on an aeroplane that I am about to operate with all the kit, including my toothpaste, which I normally take, ALL of which will be locked in the flight deck with me. Incidentally, there is a set of flight controls in there which can cause all sorts of havoc in the wrong hands, with or without a tube of Crest.

I can understand why the restrictions have been imposed on passengers. It is TOTALLY POINTLESS to impose them on pilots.

[LD Max]

There is a place for Industrial Action and this is not it!
We are are the highest state of security for a reason ...the reason is a suspected attack is still imminent (according to the US sources several of these headcases are still on the run... probably with materials to carry out an attack).


I take it that's a "no" then. :ugh: "Proportionate Security" doesn't mean "No Security". It means using intelligence.... intelligently.

Pax are part of my concern (see original post) because if we make it impossible for them to do business, we won't have one eventually. And you don't need a mobile phone for a detonator. A wrist watch or, (for that matter), a single swan vestas would do the job. Get the rubber gloves on if you're going to remove all risks. As a commercial pilot, I am also a PAX, and speaking entirely for myself... no phone, no laptop, no flight. So yes, I DO want to give the pax their phones back. There was nothing wrong with the X-ray and Sniff procedures as far as portable electronic items were concerned. All we need is a bit more vigilance in the light of intelligence received.

But yeah, primary concern is, as you all say, to do with how we can continue to do our jobs as pilots in the present environment - hence this poll.

[GreatCircle]

You're right alosaurus, of course. What is being said is if this state of affairs continues for more than one or two weeks, then something has to be done. It's all about a proportionate response, and from what I saw at LGW, they weren't ready to implement it for crews, staff or our customers.

In the longer term, intelligence led security is the only way forward - taking away water bottles ad finitum is a knee jerk reaction for the ultra short term.

I noted that one of the suspects rounded up has already been released without charge, by the way.

[6_DoF]

If these restrictions were agreed upon months ago the why didn't the useless muppets of a cross section comittee put a contingency plan in place for the aditional security required?????????

[hotmetal]

...and why didn't they think of the practical problems crew would face working away for days.

[hotmetal]

I'm not saying they are not a concern. Just at the moment [ie now this evening] I am trying to sort out the practicalities of working round the country for days with no toiletries. Obviously problems concerning passengers are of huge concern but I am talking about my problem for me now this moment.

[Human Factor]

...and why didn't they think of the practical problems crew would face working away for days.

Because none of them work day to day on the flight deck of an airliner and they were either too arrogant or too stupid to ask anyone who did.

[Human Factor]

So where's this poll, then?

Actually, I can guess the result. Danny may as well save his bandwidth.

[GreatCircle]

Well clearly people here are talking about pilots.Like me trotting around the country for 4 days with no toothpaste/shaving gel/piles cream etc. Problems concerning passengers are not my immediate concern just now.

Wrong. Issues facing customers right now are all of our concern. Issues facing fellow crew members are equally all of our concern on both your side and our side of the Pond.

If I was in SE England right now, I'd hop on Eurostar. And if wanted to hop over the Pond connect through AMS etc...

As far as I am aware, airline passengers help pay our wages...right ?

P.S. Hotmetal...you notr being allowed to take toothpaste and other necessities is assenine...mine were taken from me at LGW before we got to our bus for the westbound hop.

[Rivet gun]

It a little early to be calling for industrual action on this, not least because such action might only further damage the interests of our employers and customers.

Whilst these forums have identified serious errors in reasoning and logic on the part of the DfT and airport security to the detrement of both flight safety and security, we are not in posession of the intelligence and threat analysis information required to make a fully rational analysis of what measures are properly required (and if we were we could not discuss it on a public forum).

The matter is in the hands of the NASC, so the next step its to make our concerns known to BALPA (who I believe have a rep on the NASC) and any other known NASC members.

[Loose rivets]

As an OAP, I don't have much clout, but there is no doubt that there should be some sort of action NOW.

Aircrew are as capable as anyone of learning the security dangers. Train the crews in security, don't humiliate them and deprive them of their necessities. All aircrew should be part of the war against terrorism, not deemed an enemy.

[LD Max]

I'm not saying they are not a concern. Just at the moment [ie now this evening] I am trying to sort out the practicalities of working round the country for days with no toiletries. Obviously problems concerning passengers are of huge concern but I am talking about my problem for me now this moment.

Understood. :ok: I'm sure the majority of us are all on the same wavelength.

[LD Max]

Whilst these forums have identified serious errors in reasoning and logic on the part of the Dti and airport security to the detrement of both flight safety and security, we are not in posession of the intelligence and threat analysis information required to make a fully rational analysis of what measures are properly required (and if we were we could not discuss it on a public forum).
The matter is in the hands of the NASC, so the next step its to make our concerns known to BALPA (who I believe have a rep on the NASC) and any other known NASC members.

I think any "concerns" we make known to BALPA should include the fact that Nobody seems to know the threat analysis information required to make a fully rational analysis. That, indeed, is part of the problem.

[pax2908]

Stringent security searches which have led to long delays and cancellations at Heathrow are not sustainable, airport operator BAA has warned.

Indeed. I can imagine that other EU airports/operators are suffering as well since they too must implement new security measures, even if not as bad as in the UK (?). This has to have a cost (staff working extra hours). At one airline (not the only one, I guess) crew are only paid from the moment the a/c doors are closed. But now that long delays become the rule (delay to make it to the a/c, delay to wait for late PAX) this will need to change. In the long term, they will have to build new facilities for security checks, how long will it take? One year? The problem seems to be that nobody is prepared to pay for it.

[BEagle]

Wrong - virtually no change to existing procedures at FRA last night!

Unlike that god-awful bus station know as LHR T2, FRA seems to have enough people and facilities to cope.....

[Airbubba]

From an ALPA e-mail yesterday:

"...In the United States, uniformed flightcrew members have been exempted from the new screening protocols and will be permitted to continue to carry liquid and gel-type materials in their carry-on luggage. However, the new screening procedures may subject flightcrew members to random screening in areas other than checkpoints. ALPA members should continue to be patient with security screenings as these changes progress.

In Canada, flightcrew members with proper identification are exempted—operating pilots, deadheading pilots, and commuting pilots are considered flightcrew members..."

[hotmetal]

If you are seriously telling me your major concern is that you have to buy toiletries for a couple of weeks and for this you want to strike I have little else to say to you.

That's good news and really cheered me up. I didn't realise it was only going to be for a couple of weeks. I was worried that it would be a long term issue. I feel better now.

[chandlers dad]

I do not feel that its time for industrial action but I do feel that its way past time for us to be writing out representatives everywhere. From ALPA (or BALPA) to elected representatives to AOPA and the like.

If there then is no response, and no letup in the stupid security in a reasonable amount of time, say ten days to two weeks, then its time to talk about taking action.

I do not feel that the pax need nor deserve to have their electronics of any type back anytime soon. There are just too many ways to turn something like this into a detonator and its just not worth it IMHO. Bring a good paperback and read during the flight...

CD

[fantom]

From an ALPA e-mail yesterday:
"...
In Canada, flightcrew members with proper identification are exempted—operating pilots, deadheading pilots, and commuting pilots are considered flightcrew members..."
Oh yes?
Tell that to the YVR rummage squad this afternoon.
It seems disproportionate to me if they assume I afford the same risk (a uniformed captain of a trans-atlantic heavy, leading a crew of twelve) as a 17-35 year-old...you-know-the-rest-of-it-profile.
Shoes off and x-rayed as well? Cummon.
The 'no fluids' rule was a mystery until I read the papers' explanation; then it was obvious why the new requirements are in place. I can't see why anyone can object, given the intel on the chemistry.

[issi noho]

Go one step further and make it one procedure for all flight crews worldwide.
As you get your medical renewed your send a copy and are given an ID from that? No current first class medical and no ID?
How can this be made to work but the above is correct, we need to do something and make it stick, if not only for the UK but would be nice to have something worldwide.


Just a medical or would you need a job too, what about the light aircraft at MAN not to mention my mate who flies his Citation on a PPL. What on earth have doctors got to do with security, would you like them to swear an allegiance to Christianity or is it enough if they don't have beards?

[LD Max]

I do not feel that its time for industrial action but I do feel that its way past time for us to be writing out representatives everywhere. From ALPA (or BALPA) to elected representatives to AOPA and the like.

If there then is no response, and no letup in the stupid security in a reasonable amount of time, say ten days to two weeks, then its time to talk about taking action.

I do not feel that the pax need nor deserve to have their electronics of any type back anytime soon. There are just too many ways to turn something like this into a detonator and its just not worth it IMHO. Bring a good paperback and read during the flight...

CD

Well a fat lot of help BALPA are being at the moment. See their official advice here (http://www.balpa.org.uk/BALPA Security Briefing 10 August 2006.htm)

I note the following:

The requirements for airline crew are:

Any crew, whether operational or positioning, using passenger search areas must be subjected to the same security measures as passengers.

Crew accessing the Restricted Zone through staff search areas must carry only the items they require to perform their duties (including personal hand baggage meeting that description). All such items must be x-rayed where possible and hand searched where not. All crew must be hand searched.

However, no liquids of any type are permitted other than those mentioned above as able to be taken into the Restricted Zone by passengers.

At airports where there is no specific staff search facility, airports should make special arrangements for crew to be screened away from passengers.

We continue to work closely with the Minister for Aviation, Douglas Alexander, and his TRANSEC team at the DfT to ensure we continue to maintain as much operational normality for flight crew whilst at the same time mitigating any of the additional risks posed by the increased threat. He has asked me to express his personal thanks and gratitude to you for your efforts in keeping our aircraft safely in the air at this difficult time.

If there any are issues or anomalies that you feel we should be addressing or that have been overlooked, please do let us know as all the agencies involved in this are liaising closely and are keen to make this work as well as we can in the circumstances.

Clearly some of the more basic recommendations (such as separate crew screening areas) are not being followed by the likes of BAA.

Reading in between the bullsh*t, I suggest we take him up on his offer...

[Married a Canadian]

What I have never and probably will never understand is what is the purpose of all the security screening that you guys no doubt have to go through to get a job as an airline pilot anyway if you are then subjected to the same ludicrous security clampdown that the general public is??

Funny how in a time of supposed advanced security and safety these measures cause added consternation..ie the pilot whose contact lenses have dried up and they have no solution to re soak them..or the pilot whos airline doesn't provide crew meals sitting on a long flight with an empty stomach as no food was allowed on board.

A crew could refuse to fly on safety/comfort grounds and be fully justified I feel

[chandlers dad]

Just a medical or would you need a job too, what about the light aircraft at MAN not to mention my mate who flies his Citation on a PPL. What on earth have doctors got to do with security, would you like them to swear an allegiance to Christianity or is it enough if they don't have beards?

If you do not have a current medical, there is no way that you are a legal flight crewmember. As far as license would feel that someone should also have an ATP, otherwise they are not flying a transport catagory airplane.

Lets get real here, referring to your mate flying a baby Cessna on a private license is a joke. There is another section for jokes...

[chandlers dad]

Well a fat lot of help BALPA are being at the moment. See their official advice here (http://www.balpa.org.uk/BALPA Security Briefing 10 August 2006.htm)

Reading in between the bullsh*t, I suggest we take him up on his offer...

Totally agree. There is one very good way to get their attention. Stop paying the union dues, then en masse start sending them letters and emails asking "just when are you going to start representing the pilots instead of your own personal viewpoints?"

When the money stops coming in they will realize that they have a problem on their hands and may wake up.

[issi noho]

So what about when your medical is suspended due illness or injury. what about the fact that you can hold a medical without a job. what about all the people who go airside without being pilots what about cabin crew. It may be a baby Cessna but it's paid for and he likes to fly it. I really feel sorry for Chandler, hope his mum drives him to school.

[beamer]

Presumably if mobile phones, laptops, key-fobs and drinks were dangerous on thursday morning, they were equally dangerous on wednesday, and a week before that and a month before that etc. The fact that a group of dissidents were detained by the police after months of surveillance would mean that the police and security services not only knew who they were watching but also what their activities consisted of and the threat they presented; the idea that within a very short period of time the nature of the threat was analysed from a zero base and precise instructions issued to all UK airports and operators seems unrealistic.

Notwithstanding the threat that these young men represent, presumably the real 'professionals' within the terror network are fully versed in the ways and means of committing acts of terrorism towards the aviation industry and logically the security services are equally well aware of likely methods of implementation.

Hidden agendas going on here ?

[chandlers dad]

So what about when your medical is suspended due illness or injury. what about the fact that you can hold a medical without a job. what about all the people who go airside without being pilots what about cabin crew. It may be a baby Cessna but it's paid for and he likes to fly it. I really feel sorry for Chandler, hope his mum drives him to school.

You may get it someday. If your medical is suspended YOU ARE NOT A FLIGHT CREWMEMBER! Its not legal to operate an aircraft without a license or medical.

Your friend on the Cessna is not going to be coming onto the flight deck of a commercial airliner. He has no business there, so would not get that sort of ID card. He might be issued a flight crewmember ID of another type but not the one we are discussing here. I could care less if he is paid to fly the Cessna and likes to fly it, we are talking about work here.

Chandler enjoy's life to the fullest, without your every worrying about it.

CD

PS

What about the little baby seals in Canada? What about the dust mites living in your hair?

[LD Max]

There is one very good way to get their attention. Stop paying the union dues, then en masse start sending them letters and emails asking "just when are you going to start representing the pilots instead of your own personal viewpoints?"

I was going to click on their feedback link, but since I stopped paying my union dues I can't log in. DOH!

Seriously, you're right.

[tristar500]

Yes, I think that the UK Government (or lack of - Tony, hows Barbados...) and the CAA (Campaign Against Aviation) need to sit down and sort this mess out - ASAP. Yes, I do think that we need to have an increased security level, but to what level do we stop, OR go back to. Can we ever let our guard down now? Iam not in a position to comment on the specifics of recent days, but I was as well as many thousands of others, subjected to the military style security searches and by staff many of whom looked as though they had been dragged in, off school holidays to cover... Clueless and unsure themselves of the emergency regulations (Summer and casual staff are cheaper than contract staff)

We must combat the :mad: out there who persist in trying to get glory through death, destruction and anarchy, but there must be a measured and controlled way of doing it. Recent days have been anything but measured or controlled with each airport having different interpritations on the 'new rules regarding hand baggage'.


Problem is folks, where do we go from here...:confused:

[chandlers dad]

I was going to click on their feedback link, but since I stopped paying my union dues I can't log in. DOH!
Seriously, you're right.

Its almost a rubber stamp of what the CAA/Govt has been putting out and sounds like they could care less that their members are professionals working to keep terrorism from effecting aviation.

Anyway, here you go:

10th August 2006

Dear Colleague,

BALPA has long been aware of a potentially grave threat against aviation from a non-conventional explosive device that is hard to detect.

Based on specific intelligence, the decision to interrupt a potentially large scale attack against aircraft departing the UK was made early this morning. This operation is still far from concluded. As a sensible precaution, contingency measures were put in place to restrict any item that could potentially be used in the non-conventional device from entering aircraft cabins.

Enhanced security measures included configuring airport search combs to meet the raised threat levels and these have led to long delays as the infrastructure at airports struggles to cope at such short notice with these new requirements. When it became apparent that various airports were reaching capacity for ground movements, airspace closures were temporarily put in force. British Airways, for example, has today (Thursday) cancelled domestic and European flights as it endeavours to recover its longhaul programme. Other carriers will be similarly affected.

The threat level has been elevated with immediate effect for all civil aviation in the UK to CRITICAL. If you are unsure what this heightened security state means, please refer to the Home Office website for more detailed information at the following URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/security/current-threat-level/ or check out MI5’s website at: http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page269.html

The requirements for airline crew are:

Any crew, whether operational or positioning, using passenger search areas must be subjected to the same security measures as passengers.

Crew accessing the Restricted Zone through staff search areas must carry only the items they require to perform their duties (including personal hand baggage meeting that description). All such items must be x-rayed where possible and hand searched where not. All crew must be hand searched.

However, no liquids of any type are permitted other than those mentioned above as able to be taken into the Restricted Zone by passengers.

At airports where there is no specific staff search facility, airports should take special arrangements for crew to be screened away from passengers.

Temporary Passes

Temporary Passes must not be issued without the express permission of the Airport Security Manager.

All aircraft operators, aerodrome managers, security approved cargo agents and in-flight catering companies have been given the following guidelines to convey to passengers:

With immediate effect, the following arrangements apply to all passengers starting their journey at a UK airport and to those transferring between flights at a UK airport.

All cabin baggage will be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.

Passengers will be allowed to take through the airport security search point, in a single (ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items.
Nothing may be carried in pockets:

· Pocket sized wallets and pocket size purses plus contents (for example money, credit cards, identity cards etc (not handbags));

· Travel documents essential for the journey (for example passports and travel tickets);

· Prescription medicines and medical items sufficient and essential for the flight (eg diabetic kit), except in liquid form unless verified as authentic.

· Spectacles and sunglasses, without cases;

· Contact lens holders, without bottles of solution;

· For those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by each accompanying passenger) and sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy disposal bags);

· Female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed (eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes);

· Tissues (unboxed) and/or handkerchiefs;

· Keys (but no electrical key fobs).


All passengers will be hand searched, and their footwear and all the items they are carrying will be x-ray screened.

Pushchairs and walking aids will be x-ray screened, and only airport-provided wheelchairs will be allowed to pass through the screening point.

In addition to the above, al passengers boarding flights to the USA and all the items they are carrying, including those acquired after the central screening point, will be subjected to secondary search at the boarding gate. Any liquids discovered will be removed from the passenger.

Passengers should be encouraged to configure their baggage in line with the above requirements before arriving at the airport, and to allow plenty of time to pass through airport security screening.

We continue to work closely with the Minister for Aviation, Douglas Alexander, and his TRANSEC team at the DfT to ensure we continue to maintain as much operational normality for flight crew whilst at the same time mitigating any of the additional risks posed by the increased threat. He has asked me to express his personal thanks and gratitude to you for your efforts in keeping our aircraft safely in the air at this difficult time.


If there any are issues or anomalies that you feel we should be addressing or that have been overlooked, please do let us know as all the agencies involved in this are liaising closely and are keen to make this work as well as we can in the circumstances.

Yours sincerely

Captain Mervyn Granshaw

[Dualbleed]

You can bring all you want on to the aircraft. What I did today at LGW was to check my overnight bag with a crewtag on it, then just wait for it to arrive at the aircraft and then bring it to the cabin. As a captain you decide where tha cargo goes. !!:}

[LD Max]

Chandler's Dad: Thanks for posting all that. That'll teach me for being facetious! I actually put the link in my previous post (and copied an excerpt).

I was referring to the "feedback" link (i.e. comments), and making light of your suggestion to withhold Union Dues. :ugh:

Serves me right. :rolleyes:

But nevertheless, useful for others.

Thanks again.

[fmgc]

Tristar, from what I can understand it was the mother who had to taste the milk.

Whilst I concur that the security measures that we as crew have to endure are draconian I do not see that industrial action is the right solution. All that will do is hit the profits of our employers.

I do not, however, know what the solution is.

[fantom]

I do not, however, know what the solution is.
"Solution"?
That, precisely, is why we have to do this stuff.
It is a good job we, the British, can take a joke...

[Count von Altibar]

Couldn't agree more folks. The security situation is a farce and a total overeaction to the situation. All this bull**** from the authorities directed at professional flight crew is sickening. The job has deteriorated enough without this ill thought-out imposition of security measures. I think we should start refusing to operate if not allowed to take essential equipment with us...

[Danny]

Having just arrived in MCO I was astounded at the pathetic decision making behind this current security fiasco. As we operate from both LGW and LHR, we have been issued with two different sets of instructions on what we can and can't carry through the dedicated crew security checkpoints at both airports. For example, flight crew passing through LGW cannot take a pen! Yes, you read it correctly, we cannot carry a pen of any type on our person or in our crew bags.

We had to get to the aircraft and then wait while the cabin crew scrounged some pens for us from the passenger amenity kits so that we could start our work. At LHR one person can take a mobile phone and no one else. At LGW no one can take a phone. At one airport we can take a laptop and at the other we can't

It goes on but it just goes to show that there is a bunch of muppets somewhere dreaming up ways to make life as difficult as possible without reason. I could begin to understand if there was no difference between the airports, especially as they are both run by BAA. However, to have different sets of rules which are so ludicrously stupid just goes to prove that there are idiots of the highest order running this fiasco.

Let's not forget that these total plonkers are damaging our industry and doing the work of the terrorists by giving them credence. In fact, they are probably doing more damage because the original plot has been foiled in the first place. Don't forget that an explosive device was successfully assembled and detonated on a Philippine Airlines B747 in the 1990's. How come all of a sudden we have mass panic and hysteria from the government and the media?

I'm sorry but to have such a stupid and ineffectual rule that bans flight crew from carrying a pen on board just goes to prove that the lunatics have taken over the asylum. It is high time that Balpa and our representatives exposed these sham security rules for what they are. Just some half witted mandarin making up petty and useless rules to justify their existence with equally inept and stupid people interpreting the rules without thought or regard for the effects they have. If we don't stop them now they will have done the terrorists job for them and they are jeopardising our jobs in the process.

This is not security. This is ineptitude and absolute dumbing down. They are as bad as the terrorists themselves and deserve nothing but contempt. Either we are trusted or we aren't.

[flowman]

This aviation security clampdown is turning into an aviation clampdown.
BAW are cancelling around 200 flights out of LHR today.
That's a feckin' economic disaster.
It's all very well "enhancing" security but if there are no staff to carry out the extra tasks it is tantamount to a closure of operations.

[sky9]

Danny
This is called "covering your arse" and has nothing to do with security. Please read the Lord Stevens comments in the N of the W.

[Few Cloudy]

Actually the bomb on the Philippines ship went off but I wouldn't call it successful. Damage was insufficient to prevent the plane landing at Okinawa and one passenger died.

What was successful, was that it showed that on board assembly could be done.

As regards profile checking, all UK crew members are already profile checked - a long winded and nit picking business - so that much more is known about them than any passenger. Maybe this should now be brought to bear to save needless effort by the security people (the same overall organisation which did the profile checks in the first place) and needless problems for UK crews.

How non UK crews are profile checked varies greatly in my experience. Coordination here between authorities would also be a big help.

FC.

[A330ismylittlebaby]

If you do not have a current medical, there is no way that you are a legal flight crewmember. As far as license would feel that someone should also have an ATP, otherwise they are not flying a transport catagory airplane.

Lets get real here, referring to your mate flying a baby Cessna on a private license is a joke. There is another section for jokes...

You can have a class 1 medical without an ATPL or CPL

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Danny, through your website you'd have to be one of the better known identities amongst professional pilots around the world. Your website is read around the world - it's where thousands of pilots have turned to find out what is going on up there in the UK right now - how pilots are being affected. Just look at the number of hits on this thread alone.

Perhaps PPrune can be very influential in this crisis. Forums like this can waffle on with arguments back and forth and not actually achieve much. But then again, you can see common themes. One is that pilots need certain concessions.

You stated that you weren't even permitted pens!! That you had to scrounge them from the c/c! Whilst I understand you are trying to get the job done I think that is complete nonsense, that you shouldn't have done that and that ALL pilots should be taking a stand somewhere.

I'd really like to see accounts here on PPrune of pilots who, facing those obstacles, just TURN AROUND and go back the crew-room/hotel/home after saying, "well, you figure out how I'm to fly the plane without essential items, such as [pens/manuals/wizz-wheels/calculators/PDAs/whatever/etc]. Not my problem anymore."

If the bloody airlines and BALPA aren't going to take a stand, individuals have to! And maybe accounts of such stands, via PPrune, will encourage others, and the result will be change and concessions for crew.

We are watching you bloody Poms* with great interest and concern down here in Aus. You are leading the way in this latest brave new world. Things up there invariably flow down here (think Rugby World Cups, Ashes if you like). But seriously, you professional pilots need to take the lead and make a stand.

Good luck.

p.s. Word on our own, unofficial QF pilot forum is that things have been adjusted somewhat at LHR for pilots? In the interests of security I won't state here, in a public forum, precisely how.....

* Don't worry, it's intended as a term of endearment towards you blokes, especially at the moment.

[PT6Driver]

After 17 pages of this where are we?
Well I think that we are all agreed that we dont want anyone blowing up our planes. For that to work we need security that is workable and appropriate - not stupidity.
Some posters have said that the existing system (up to Wedensday) was not breached - wrong one of the alleged plotters was, again alegedly, working for security. Therefore the system must have been flawed or incorectly applied for this to happen.
(next time you see security personal not being searched properly, or not having their food and drinks confiscated - report a security breach!)
There are two checks involved one is identity - who are you and are you entitled to be going airside. Second are you taking anything dodgy airside that could be used by you or someone else.
The current disclosure scotland is in my opinion just a money making scheme - go to their web site and see what they actualy check on a basic disclosure.
As Danny has found out stopping anything dodgy being taken airside is now a farce with difrent rules being applied at difrent airports even within the same group. They for one should have the same rules!
This is down to the fact that because of the high demand for security personel standards are lowered and we get the lowest common denominator - this is not the way to be secure.
What is needed is realistic checks on aircrew prior to pass issue and as has been stated elsewhere quality passes with enough data on them that they cannot be bypassed.
Next our unions (IPA BALPA), The DoT and the rest of our so called govenment must draw up a standard list of what can be brought airside by aircrew. Consideration must be given to PENS:ugh: , laptops mobiles paperwork etc etc and food and drink. Why food and drink - if your airline does not provide catering there is not time on a 20-25 min turnaround to go to the landside eat and then reclear security and do your job. (before anyone asks some airports do not have food outlets airside of security).
To use our Tony's :yuk: phrase the stakeholders (US) must be consulted to make this work.
BALPA I,ve paid my dues now do your f***:mad: ing job.

[BOAC]

Should we, as a temporary measure, push via BALPA/IPA for operating crew lists to be given to security by handling agents/ops in advance of our arrival?

Leaving aside the illogicality of the measures for crew, I suggest that as a short-term measure everyone prints the copy of the D of T guidlines, carries them with them (security permitting:) ) and refers the security manager/supervisor to them if there is variation from them, reporting said persons/airport to their company and their pilots' association.

Airports should also be DIRECTED to provide separate screening channels for crew.

As Danny. PT6 and others have said (and seen), we MUST get consistency into this measure.

[RoyHudd]

No blame needs to be attached to the low-paid, unqualified (often envious) folk who are designated as security staff.

Their management are directly responsible for the woolly edicts concerning crew security checks. Nobody else. They give the orders to their oft-confused staff. Rubbish in, rubbish out.

BA are right to attack BAA, and Danny is quite right to point an accusing finger at the Civil Service. The "government" also have a duty to manage this issue.

Forget blaming Bush, Lebanon and whatever. Gets us nowhere.This airport problem could and should be solved asap by the relevant management people, who are paid well enough to take this responsibility.

And as for passenger profiling, it's needed NOW. Check out the Stephens article linked above.

EDIT. Now at post #391 on http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238387&page=20 (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238387&page=20).

Time we learnt from the Israelis, instead of blaming them for our woes. But will we?

Sadly, being a bumbling politically feeble nation, civil aviation here is destined to fizzle out. I'm looking for alternative work. And I urge wannabees to re-consider, and save your money.

[biddedout]

Danny,

There has been a much more sensible approach at MAN GLA and EDI, but I understand that the engineers are now finding themselves second in line to the retail companies. Aircraft Oxygen and Nitrogen re-supplies along with grease and oil (not closely packed of course) still appear to be banned. They are havng to make do with what stockes are left. Will the men from the ministry get a grip before they run out?:rolleyes:

[RoyHudd]

Lost my LHR-based job after 9/11. (Thanks to Mr. Bishop and the brave flying public.) Unemployed for 6 months. Can't afford a repeat.

And yes, I hope I am not only being premature but actually wrong. But I have lost any faith I had in our "authorities" leading from the front.

And as for our courageous passengers. Data next week on booking patterns will reveal exactly what the airlines need to contend with. And financial management don't care about the rights and wrongs of grounding planes, making people redundant. Nor the banks.

End of story.

[fmgc]

It is disappointing that BALPA have done nothing fr our cause here. Perhaps we should email BALPA enmasse.

[BOAC]

The IPA are also 'aware' and trying their hardest to bring sanity into this madhouse.

Along with emails to BALPA etc 'enmasse', our individual companies all have 'security advisors/departments' who should also be bombarded with this.

Never mind the poor passengers who are being dreadfully inconvenienced at the moment (at least their handling appears 'consistent'), we have this nonsense of inconsistency every day and sometimes several times a day. How our foreign crew friends are finding things I hate to think! Pens ok at LHR but dangerous items at LGW:ugh: :ugh:

I repeat - I suggest that if there is an apparent departure from DofT guidelines or even commonsense, get the duty security manager to the gate - and report it.

[fmgc]

Have sent an email to the BALPA chairman.

[Brain Potter]

Just heard BBC news say that Ryanair were calling for police and army personnel to bolster the security screening process. Somewhat ironic when Ryanair do not accept UK Armed Forces ID or Police warrant cards as suitable photo ID for check-in.

[hazardous pastime]

Danny. No pens allowed through crew security at LGW! You cannot be serious? Surely we should all just turn around and return to our crew rooms - we cannot do our jobs without the basic pen! It wouldn't take too many delayed or cancelled flights with the subsequent even more crowding in the terminal, gates occupied by non-departing a/c etc, our management would soon be screaming down the phone at the BAA. The head of security at LGW would very soon be asked to explain his reasoning when his counterpart up the road at LHR is operating to a different set of rules!


I shall look forward to going through LGW this week.

[omnidirectional737]

I went back to work yesterday at LGW and had no problem taking my normal flight bag through security, with pens, mobile phones, calculators car keys etc. Only difference from before was that I had to remove my shoes and was patted down.

At the car park Easyjet have a sign up telling there crews what the are not allowed to take with them. Including only theCaptain being allowed a phone. Can someone explain what is the point of all this!

[LD Max]

Having just arrived in MCO I was astounded at the pathetic decision making behind this current security fiasco.

For example, flight crew passing through LGW cannot take a pen! Yes, you read it correctly, we cannot carry a pen of any type on our person or in our crew bags.

Madness. As I pointed out in this earlier post (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2774126&postcount=359), this is contrary to the guidelines issued by BALPA.

In particular the fact that essential crew items should be permitted, whilst subject to a hand search if not possible to x-ray. The muppets doing this obviously feel they don't have the time... Which leads me to the other disparity, that Crew should have their own dedicated screening channels.

These failures and inconsistencies by BAA need to be reported on each occasion. (I quite like the idea of taking a copy of the guidlines with you to beat the muppet over the head with).

[chrisbl]

I am sorry for being an old cynic, but the tosh being said here about the aircrew making a stand on behalf of themselves and passengers makes me laugh. Industrial action was being contemplated this month to force the airlines to cough up on pensions, pay etc.

The result was that the passengers were facing the same sort of disruption as they are now facing. The scenes at Heathrow seem similar to the last couple of Augusts. Pass the barff bags quick. aircrew on the side of passengers - what a joke.

Now that the airlines are taking a hammering anyone fancy putting in the final nails into the coffin with industrial action?

Actually, its a good time to go on strike, make your point but ........

[moist]

Danny,

You're right of course. Rarely do I read something as angry as this, from you.
I don't understand the fact that I who have been given an airport pass, who have been CRCd and x-rayed every day of my life, suddenly can't take my bloomin food on board??
I, who have been flying 4-500 passengers every day in the recent and distant pass, can't take my personal pen with me on board?
I think that poor John Read must be unaware of this and in the name of all of us pilots, PPRUNE should contact him directly and demand the immediate removal of ALL restrictions from flightdeck crew, with immediate effect!
. If this doesn't happen, we must unite and say enogh is enough!

[Ranger1]

There is little BALPA or the Airlines can do to change the current situation! The lunatics are now running the asylum and are doing it under the heading of national security! This means anyone who speaks out and challenges the sanity of some procedures is informed they don’t have the big picture !

I think we all understand in the current climate extra security is needed but we have to accept all the passenger security in the world won’t stop a bomb getting on board. I don’t intend to go into detail on an open forum but anyone who works around an airport knows what I mean! There is a risk and always will be until we tackle the issues that breed these people and stop hounding our security forces when they make mistakes! Mistakes will be made and on occasion innocents will be affected, killed or falsely accused it is the nature of the war we are in.

The only way the security procedures will change is passenger power! Vote with your feet, write to your MP, Get your employers to put pressure on the government and form pressure groups! Make the men in grey suits justify these procedures. At the moment they just claim national security and the airline industry has to tow the line!

[A and C]

Above we have 20 or so pages of examples of the result of the ill conceved "security enhancments" but if the D f T are not reading this website it is to no good effect.

I have talked to the D f T about one of the issues raised above in this case the new measures are a reduction in security.

The reaction was one of surprize that the increased security had made the situation worse and it was quite clear that things that had never crossed there minds are becoming real issues.

They say that they have consulted the airline industry but if they have the conversation was very one way and not with the people who have to work at the coalface.

The best thing that all of you can do is to pick up the phone and call D f T with your individual problems this way the real situation will get to them not what your managers think is happening

[fireflybob]

LD Max, quite agree - the obvious is so blindingly obvious!

Too much PC around that's the problem.

[BOAC]

A warning to all on Danny's behalf - he has stated (Post #158) that posts NOT related to crew security issues on this thread will be 'moderated'.

There are several other threads elsewhere on PPRune where conspiracy and newspaper articles can be discussed.

Do not be surprised if your posts disappear:eek:

[brakedwell]

One thing that is guaranteed to slow down a return to normality - LOSS OF FACE.

[slingsby]

There is nothing BALPA can do about the current inept Security Managers at these airports.

The Dtr have made several mandatory instructions, but a majority of what you are suffering now are mearly recommendations, interpretted quite wrongly and to the detriment of all concerned by the Airport Security Managers.

I have seen the briefings, I have seen the notices and I am flabbergasted that such rules and recommendations have been interpreted as absolute. My crew yesterday had to wait for over an hour for their transport after a flight nearly exceeding their FDP, the relief crew had nearly two hours in security. Fortunately nothing was removed from them, so I didn't have masses of gear and goodies to retrive.

Yesterday at LHR if you entered through one end of a particular terminal, you couldn't take pens, lighters, cigarettes or even a poor girls banana (no jokes about eating it please) but yet at the other end through the same terminal, a different security post (controlled by the same control room) you could take your pens, lighters and cigarettes through.

[jdaley]

what is the purpose of all the security screening that you guys no doubt have to go through to get a job as an airline pilot anyway if you are then subjected to the same ludicrous security clampdown that the general public is??


Because the guy/gal going through security does not have to board. All they have to do is meet someone who is or leave material in a pre-arranged location. Equally any mixing of reagents does not have to wait until after boarding. ie Keeping an eye open for a pair of miscreants on board will miss the pair that met up airside. (Facilitated by the fact that many UK airports do not screen at the gate)

If aircrew are confident that their ID cannot be forged/misappropriated etc and that security can recognise a valid ID they are entitled to complain - otherwise life's a bitch - at least the mandatory cavity searches haven't started yet.

(Not that I'm arguing for a ban on pens. :) )

[LD Max]

Here are your main BALPA contacts. I suggest we all get on to it: I think we all know what needs to be said!


All members calling BALPA will be asked which Company they work for and will be passed to the appropriate staff member. This will ensure consistency and continuity in issue solving and will allow us to improve both internal and external communication with existing and prospective members.BAC Express, Britannia, bmi mainline, Buzz, Excel Airways, First Choice, FB Heliservices, GB Airways, Loganair, MyTravel, Thomas Cook, QinetiQ, bmi regional, bmi baby, Astraeus, (Other Airlines / Members: Surname A-F)Maggie [email protected] ([email protected])
020 8476 4048

--------------------

British Airways, BACX (secondees), BIH, Bristow Helicopters, Flybe, FR Aviation Limited, Monarch Airlines, Police Aviation Services, ScotAirways, Scotia Helicopters, Bond Air Services, (Other Airlines / Members: Surname G-N)Debra [email protected] ([email protected])
020 8476 4064

--------------------

BACX, British Mediterranean, EasyJet, KLM City Hopper, Virgin, Air Wales, Ryanair, (Other Airlines / Members: Surname O-Z)Pauline [email protected] ([email protected])
020 8476 4050

[BusyB]

jdaley,

All who go airside would be equally, and in many cases more likely, to pose such a risk.

"If aircrew are confident that their ID cannot be forged/misappropriated etc and that security can recognise a valid ID they are entitled to complain"

How many Police, Security, Airside shop staff, ID's/Passes go missing every year yet are they disarmed and having the requirements of their trade taken away?

There seems to be a lot of bias from Officials, Police, Security, Management and some of the general public against Pilots and its about time these people grew up and recognised we have a job to do as well.:*

[LD Max]

There is nothing BALPA can do about the current inept Security Managers at these airports.

Agree / sympathise with everything you said in your post, except the above. BALPA are represented on the Dft TRANSEC board. The security managers are controlled from above and will do what they're bl**dy well told or lose their jobs!

[LD Max]

A warning to all on Danny's behalf - he has stated (Post #158) that posts NOT related to crew security issues on this thread will be 'moderated'.

There are several other threads elsewhere on PPRune where conspiracy and newspaper articles can be discussed.

Do not be surprised if your posts disappear:eek:

I believe my request for a "poll" thread has been merged with this one. (Presumably Danny didn't want a poll on industrial action, despite his obvious frustration.) However some of the comments you refer to above may have appeared in that thread also. May I kindly ask that such instances are moved rather than deleted if that's the case.

Thanks.

Edit: Almost impossible to 'track back' and check, but AFAIK the 'poll' posts are still in place as they do relate to crew issues. Anything else eg concerning pax screening, profiling, airlines profits or conspiracy theories is liable to get the 'big chop' from one of us.

Edit: Poll thread has been merged with this one, although the posts are intact. Anyway - point taken.

[LLuke]

Now the UK government is keeping the threat level increased, does that mean they are expecting more terroristic activities? Or are the lower security levels considered permanently inadequate, waiting to be revised? I am off to LHR tonight (ex AMS), hope we can stay on board and avoid all the hassle during the turnaround.

Regarding the unions I think they will have a limited input in security related procedures. Do think that the bigger airliners understand their interest in having crew friendly procedures and I sincerely hope the current situation will not be abused to enforce body-scanners and procedures to hack in our personal do and don'ts (Unless it would be O.K. to buy MP3's in Russia).

[xetroV]

The unions could temporarily shutdown aviation altogether, and I'm tempted to say they should (I'm also tempted to quit aviation and pursue an alternative career right now, but I know that feeling will subside). The industry is fragile as it is, but taking action now could, in the long term, be better than sitting and waiting and keeping a low profile. The future of the industry is at stake here, as is the nature of our society. Note: this is not a British problem; this is affecting us all, worldwide.

Or maybe I'm just pissed because I ordered a nice new laptop only five days ago. Should arrive tomorrow. :{

[islandhopper]

A quick question for fellow commuters - what is happening at Lhr with your baggage - you used to take it to the gates when on standby and in the case of Aer Lingus you have to go to the gate to check in!!!, can you still take all your baggage with you through security?

I suppose it's all changed again!!!! :ugh:

[GreatCircle]

Services eastward bound over the Pond from my outfit now have a selection of pens and other writing materials in a pouch left on the flight deck, by forward thinking Canucks rather than operational policy !

In-bound, I lost my beloved Bic, to an over-jealous screener, and as Roy Hudd says, the envy seems to be present in spades, allowing for the behaviour to be exacerbated.

At least here in Canada, we are exempt from the farce...for now. Understand, CATSA are looking at it, as we speak :rolleyes:

Suggest somehow pens from amenity kits if available etc. are placed in the flightdeck until the curtain comes down on this nonsense...

In the end, it's not sustainable for crews nor passengers, and as many have said here, the Israeli intelligence led approach is the only way.....sooner the better...

[30W]

I operated out of LGW North yesterday, Jubilee House. I have to say as a visiting pilot with non BAA ID I was pleasantly surprised at security.

Yes I was allowed to carry flight bag, pens, keys with electric fob, etc totally unhindered apart from normal x-ray. Shoes were x-rayed, and I was frisked, but all in efficient and friendly manner.

Company colleague operating a long haul to SFB popped from crew room to staff security point to enquire if he could carry his lap top and was advised that he could.

Seems there are differing standards around, but having prepared for a possible epic at LGW, I endured nothing like it:ok:

30W

[GreatCircle]

Good to hear 30W...seems the different standards apply to each individual security screener, rather than by location..inconsistency being the watchword.

Very interesting..

[Stall Horn]

Here are your main BALPA contacts. I suggest we all get on to it: I think we all know what needs to be said!

Thanks LD. Letter sent as follows: (Copied here if anyone else wants to use it as a template).

In the BALPA Security Briefing (http://www.balpa.org/intranet/BALPA%20Security%20Briefing%2010%20August%202006.htm (http://www.balpa.org/intranet/BALPA%20Security%20Briefing%2010%20August%202006.htm)) our Chairman stated:

"If there any are issues or anomalies that you feel we should be addressing or that have been overlooked, please do let us know as all the agencies involved in this are liaising closely and are keen to make this work as well as we can in the circumstances."

Accordingly, I am writing to submit my comments.

Does BALPA have ANY IDEA of the concern being expressed by British Pilots over this fiasco? There is serious talk of pilots turning on their heels and walking back to their crew rooms when faced with such draconian measures that prevent them even taking a PEN onboard!

I would refer you to a thread which is running on the Professional Pilot's Rumour Network (PPRuNe). I'll start you off on page 10, as the situation has escalated since the earlier posts. We're now up to page 20. To save you the time of sifting through all of it, some pertinent extracts follow below. Edited out for brevity. While it may be a bit time consuming, I would kindly urge you to read them.

These comments express views supported by me and many others. While some of the "opinions" on specific security procedures may be "uninformed", there is an undercurrent of unrest and a belief that BALPA is not representing it's members interests in this crisis. There is a feeling by many that industrial action may be called for.

In summary, we feel that the procedure outlined in the Chairman's statement is not being followed and there are major inconsistencies between procedures at different airports - all (apparently) run by BAA. In particular, Flight Crew are generally not being screened separately from PAX and there seems to be no effort in setting up such screening procedures. Hand-searches of crew items are not being performed in many cases, and petty confiscations, (such as pens, tea bags and toffee crisps), extending to PDAs, Electronic Flight Bags and Mobile Phones are beginning to obstruct the crew in their duties, elevate stress and fatigue and destroy any sense of cooperation between crew and security services. The security procedures are so draconian, that not only can crew members not bring personal refreshments on board, but the short turnarounds prevent crews from obtaining any personal refreshments throughout the course of their duty periods.

Of less immediate concern, (but an issue nevertheless), is that blanket banning of hand luggage for passengers will, if not revised, damage the industry and jeopardise jobs. This would not take long, and there is much speculation that there must be a better way. With the insurance situation often not covering valuable electronic items in the hold, passengers and crew are now often faced with Hobson's Choice. Indeed many laptops and PDAs contain such sensitive information that they are not permitted to be let out of their owners sight by virtue of the Data Protection Act. Many passengers will opt to take the boat or the train for destinations in reach. Corporate customers may well resort to tele-conferencing as an alternative. These are all serious threats to our industry, (especially on the more profitable business sectors), and must be addressed in short order.

There is considerable alarm that these measures may not be temporary - and there will be some pressure to make them a permanent feature. The Aviation Security Commission (TRANSEC) is charged with the responsibility for these decisions and we believe this must NOT be allowed to happen. BALPA does have representation on TRANSEC. It is time this unholy mess was sorted.

Yours sincerely,

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238656&page=10 (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238656&page=10)

[slingsby]

LD Max

totally agree with your sentiments too. but Balpa have only a token representation on the commitee, and are not included in the TRANSEC or NASP decisions, they can make recommendations to the board and advise of potential impact connotations. These are mearly guidelines, and then the relelvant Airport Security Manager has a decision to make on these "recommendations" or "guidelines".

Islandhopper, no you can't check in at the gates, and no you can't take any baggage through security. At times over this weekend, if you didn't actually have a ticket or proof of purchase etc, you weren't even allowed into the terminal.

The next 24hrs are going to be intersting, as many stupid ideas about revamping and ammending LHR security are being banded about. Some ideas are worth exploring, some are laughable. I just enjoyed chatting to people BAA employed on the terminal doors, great job but not alot of clue about what was going on inside the terminals. They kept our pax outside for hours, in the rain and only when I told Ops and Apron that I would be waiting for everyone, did they actually get their fingers out and find my pax in the melee outside.

My VP flight ops flew yesterday, unfortunately I cannot print his comments about his experience as a passenger, safe to say he if had a choice LHR and BAA would be last on his list.

[chandlers dad]

Thanks LD. Letter sent as follows: (Copied here if anyone else wants to use it as a template).

Just sent letters to various organizations and people. Time has passed for doing something and we need to voice our concerns before we have a safety issue.

CD

[Danny]

I was issued with a notice at crew check-in listing the different requirements for both LGW and LHR about what can and can't be carried with flight crew to the aircraft. For LGW the list said NO pens. You could carry a laptop if it was essential for your job as a crew member. Of course those that elected to take their laptops, if questioned about them only had to say that they were required even if they weren't. It shows how absurd the rules are.

I have no doubt that some airlines have not distributed lists to their crews about what can and can't be carried and subsequently many have carried through pens, wittingly or unwittingly. As I operate to the USA, there are even more different interpretations on the rules. Perhaps only USA bound crews cannot carry pens? The point is that there are different directives in force, most likely individual interpretations of the recommendations from the DfT TranSec.

If there are different interpretations then it means that these people are throttling our industry and endangering our economy which in turn endangers our jobs. There is no way I am advocating any sort of industrial action. I am not so stupid as to realise that to damage my employers business when it is not their fault is not the way to go.

As pilots, we are doing our best to get our passengers away to their destinations. We are going that extra mile already by being as flexible as possible to try and minimise the disruption. Our schedules are shot to pieces and crew duty times are being stretched well into discretion. We are responsible adults with a duty of care but we are expected to be subjected to ill thought through security rules that do absolutely nothing whatsoever to protect ourselves and our pax.

The security screeners are just doing their jobs. They are instructed from on above by their managers who receive their instructions from further up the idiocy chain. Somewhere along the line common sense and logic have been thrown away and we have the farce that is such a hot topic for discussion. Even worse, we now have doubts about any successful prosecution should it ever get to court because of statements and soundbites made by ministers and police. The media released identities because the Chancellor authorised the Bank of England to list those whose assets have been released and other politicians leaked the info in some sick attempt to curry favour with their favourite journalists. By making statements such as "prevented mass murder on an unimaginable scale", they have possibly prejudiced the case according to the Attorney General.

So, now we have a throttling of our industry by mandarins reacting in typical knee-jerk mode with edicts and rules that are being interpreted differently at different airports which only serve to do the terrorists jobs for them. I wish there was an easy answer but unfortunately we will be told that we do not have the big picture and that excuse will be used to cover up the ineptitude and poor decision making behind this fiasco.

Of course, none of this is helped by the media hysteria that is kicked up. Already we see people on here posting 'facts' that are not verified or distorted. For example, one of the suspects arrested is quoted to have been employed at LHR as a "security guard". Immediately muppets will assume that a 'security guard' in some way controls the security we are discussing here. Well, if you are trying to associate a 'security guard' with a 'security screener' then you need your head examining. We all know that many 'security guards' are employed by private security companies on minimum wages and with only the most basic of training and their jobs are to keep an eye out and check passes. The screeners are definitely not 'security guards' and their job is only screening pax and crew.

So, let's not fall into the media hysteria trap. We have enough problems just trying to do our jobs at the moment. Yesterday I decided to put my crew bag into my suitcase and carried only my passport, licence and a spare pair of glasses. That was it. I must say that the strain on my back having to lug cases and bags was much relieved but I did feel a bit like a lemon waiting for the cabin crew to pilfer some pens from the pax amenity kits. We need to be putting pressure on our professional associations to use their lobbying powers to get the necessary changes and lifting of ill thought through, knee-jerk rules that have no consistency or logic. We need them to start getting back the trust that we deserve. We are professionals and work very hard to get where we are today and we don't need Muppets doing the terrorists jobs for them which puts our jobs on the line.

[Max Angle]

For LGW the list said NO pens.I wonder how many thousands of pens are already airside, I presume they are now going to visit all the airside offices and round up these hazardous items before somebody allows one to fall into the hands of pilot.

[Bumz_Rush]

I suppose a soft pencil or even a crayon is acceptable for tech logs these days...

dont forget the rubber.......(sorry erasor)...... Bumz

[Accident Prawn]

Here is a question:

If after a security check we are being let airside to do the job, then how come we are being allowed to carry only certain items???

In other words; if we are deemed to be safe enough to be let through then surely we are safe enough to be let through with anything we deem necessary to take through with us. These things being pens, food, computers.... you name it!

I don't understand the logic - help!

[30W]

Danny,

Our crew room at LGW also has a big list in clear view for everyone to read. The list does NOT include pens. My flight case probably had about 6 in it, and one in my shirt pocket as I went through security. All colleagues similar story, as well as the laptop, which was not required for work use. No problems with mobile phones for crew members either - I carried my own plus company phone, all crew carried their own through.......

Perhaps standards differ between terminals even? We were using the security facilities supplied by BA at Jubilee House. It is not manned by BAA security, but by a contractor to BA. I really can't fault either their practicality, or their attitude. Yes we were all properly hand searched, shoes x-rayed etc, so dft standards are being maintained, but in a practical way to those working airside.

Haven't used any other UK airport yet so can't comment. One thought though, perhaps I could take through stacks of pens at LGW North, then flog em to you all coming through the south 'penless'......:rolleyes:

30W

[Banana99]

You can bring all you want on to the aircraft. What I did today at LGW was to check my overnight bag with a crewtag on it, then just wait for it to arrive at the aircraft and then bring it to the cabin. As a captain you decide where tha cargo goes. !!:}
My trick too.

Why all the handwringing when it's very simple to bypass this temporary measure?

[LD Max]

If there are different interpretations then it means that these people are throttling our industry and endangering our economy which in turn endangers our jobs. There is no way I am advocating any sort of industrial action. I am not so stupid as to realise that to damage my employers business when it is not their fault is not the way to go.

Yes... but clearly the other side to the same coin is this might be the best way to save it. We all want to protect our industry and our employers. A one day walk-out (or even 2 or 3) would not make any airlines go under, but I'm pretty sure the Security issues would be resolved PDQ.

I'd support a majority who wanted to do so and would back any union action to the hilt.

[Danny]

Just goes to show the differences in interpretation of the rules at different security checkpoints at the same airport. We go through the BAA crew security Southside at Concorde House. Pens allowed Northside but we are not to be trusted with them Southside. Absolute farce and proof, if ever it was needed, that those that apply the interpretation to the rules are doing their best to aid the terrorists by screwing up our jobs and the travel plans of our pax.

[haughtney1]

I think perhaps there needs to be more pressure bought to bear on Big Balpa, with the corresponding threat of disruption.

We go through the BAA crew security Southside at Concorde House.

Most of the concorde security staff are muppets..in my experience...

The present situation is serious, no one is disputing that, however, the measures that have been put in place have been applied with little thought other than being reactionary. For crews, these kind of measures make our jobs very very difficult to do.

I wonder when the press will pickup on this??

[Max Angle]

then just wait for it to arrive at the aircraft and then bring it to the cabin. As a captain you decide where the cargo goes. !!I've considered that one myself but checked baggage is not allowed in the cabin and that’s that. I suspect if you were spotted by security doing what you describe you would, at best, be frogmarched out of the restricted zone and have your ID taken away.

Companies, and mine is one, that do not have systems in place to check in crew baggage need to get one sorted quickly so that this farce of having to go away without de-odorant, toothpaste etc. is ended ASAP. Quite what I will do when I next need to stay away I have not decided yet but I don't think it's going to involve leaving home base without the means to perform such basic tasks as brushing my teeth and washing my hair.

[juan post]

You are a passenger on a 767, seated at the overwing exit. The last 30 minutes have seemed like eternity as you witnessed brutal treatment of cabin crew and other passengers. The aircraft is flying low over New York, the sun shines brightly on the cloudless day but you see no beauty. It’s very noisy with some people crying and others shouting the engines too are making more noise than usual.

Suddenly you hear a sickening noise; your mind slows down the action to help you see clearly the enormity of the situation you now find yourself in. You can see the cabin in front of you collapsing towards you. You hear another noise, it is the sound of your bones breaking as your legs crash hard against the seat in front, you feel no pain. You are powerless to stop your head hitting the mass before you, as your brain sloshes and pulps inside your skull your life ends, it would have anyway as the man who sat behind you now is forced against the back of your seat, the pressure breaking your ribs and your sides split open and soon there remains nothing identifiable.

Your journey is over, three rows behind a woman and her child hear the noise of their own bones breaking yet they feel no pain….

If that has no effect then lets refresh our short memories;

In 1991 I sat up late one night as I watched cruise missiles land in Iraq, 1 month later the parent company of the profitable airline I worked for predicted losses and at the end of that charter season the airline was closed. Many others closed too. There was a recovery of the industry until things were quite good really then came the day we call 9/11. Respectfully disregarding the obvious suffering of those involved, the decline in the industry was devastating, all the major airlines suffered losses, maybe myth but I read that the losses combined were greater than the profits made since flying began nearly one hundred years before. Aircraft orders were cancelled, crews and support staff in airlines and ancillary sectors were laid off, salaries and pensions all suffered.

For reasons which are many and varied this industry finds itself a target for a group or groups of people who will stop at nothing to create a spectacular demonstration of their power to disrupt our lives. They also have no problem, wrongly or rightly, of justifying that act on Western behaviour towards them.

When Isay stop at nothing, that is exactly what I mean. How any professional pilot can assume that every other pilot thinks like them and has no sympathy with these criminal aims is beyond reason. No pilot has as yet been linked to radical extremism but that is just historical. The fact is that these groups are well funded and their members are intelligent, dedicated (beyond Western definitions of the word) individuals who would likely find no problem completing an approved course in flying training. Had these people begun training following 9/11, they could well be approaching commands of regional jets or joined the large numbers leaving the regionals for flag carriers and other majors. Pilots and aircrew should expect no special treatment other than the ability to fast track a queue.

The security services this week have done their job to the best of their ability and time will tell how successful they have been and continue to be. The threat level has been taken to its highest ever level and procedures put in place that some consider unreasonable, well unfortunately that is what happens when people, even professionals, are given an unfamiliar environment (you may know that if you have ever been asked to explain your reasoning during a loft ex). Very soon security professionals will create a workable and effective control, they quite simply have to. In the meantime we should be and are working with the shop floor security searchers as an example to passengers and a deterrent to would be criminals. Whilst we argue over pens the only truth is that the industry simply cannot afford another 9/11 or 7/7 and neither are we privy to all the facts or intelligence.

JP

[tribekey]

just to add to the sense of bemusement can anyone explain the logic behind this;
I'm an ATCO ,tower is airside,i don't have physical access to aircraft, on turning up for work i have to proceed through security.Staff are now not allowed to take any liquid airside. I'll say that again, we can not take a drink to work.there is only water from a cooler in the tower.Great, an eight hour shift with only water.Hopefully sense can soon prevail or maybe security personnel might like to watch whilst we control just to ensure we aren't planning anything?

[Chilli Monster]

Pilots and aircrew should expect no special treatment other than the ability to fast track a queue

Emotive post juan, but totally pointless.

All the pilot needs to commit an act is his finger on the A/P Disc switch - no amount of searching or restrictive security measures would stop that happening.

Meanwhile, the rest of us, be it aircrew, ATCO's or engineers are being prevented from doing our jobs effectively by a DfT remit more intent on being seen to be doing something rather than achieving anything sensible.

The lunacy needs to stop now, and the professional associations (BALPA, GATCO etc) need to address this before the industry suffers anymore damage - more than any terrorist could ever wish to achieve.

[haughtney1]

How any professional pilot can assume that every other pilot thinks like them and has no sympathy with these criminal aims is beyond reason. No pilot has as yet been linked to radical extremism but that is just historical. The fact is that these groups are well funded and their members are intelligent, dedicated (beyond Western definitions of the word) individuals who would likely find no problem completing an approved course in flying training. Had these people begun training following 9/11, they could well be approaching commands of regional jets or joined the large numbers leaving the regionals for flag carriers and other majors. Pilots and aircrew should expect no special treatment other than the ability to fast track a queue

Which is why the there needs to be increased profiling....if the person is already in a position to do harm i.e. being one of the flightdeck crew...no number of scans....metal detectors...body searches, will change this!
Juan you need to get a grip, you've missed the point!, none of the current measures would go anyway to stopping this kind of attack! (your comments whilst well meaning, border on the verge of idiotic and are certainly very very nieve)

[GreatCircle]

I had no idea UK ATPL holders had to take lessons in Oliver Stone cinematography. JP, we all know about 9/11, 7/7, IRA rockets over EGLL...etc etc. And all very nasty it is too.

This thread as BOAC has rightly pointed out is about issues affecting aircrew in the day-to-day operation of their aircraft.

We all understand why civil aviation might be a target to those who are delusional for whatever reason, but the fact remains, the restrictions placed on those of us, in the privileged position of operating aircraft, are untenable and placing operational safety in doubt.

Period.

P.S. Added later after re-reading Juan Post's drivel: I am not entirely sure why you posted such an insensitive, sensationalist piece of utter crap. Some of us would be ashamed to admit you are an apparent fellow professional.

[Loose rivets]

Danny "There is no way I am advocating any sort of industrial action. I am not so stupid as to realise that to damage my employers business when it is not their fault is not the way to go."


This is part of what I was getting at when talking of our hands being bound by professionalism.

I firmly believed that aviation was so economically frail, that it could withstand very little industrial action. But now I'm not sure.

I'm slowly coming to the opinion that it would do less harm to act now, rather than when we have descended into deeper chaos. This pen issue is beyond credulity, and it shows just how unaware ‘security' is about the nature of our jobs.



Anger, and our medical well-being.

There is another major factor involved in treating operating aircrew in this way. The anger and frustration is NOT what a pilot should feel when starting a long duty. The chemical changes that take place are well known, they can be very, very dangerous. The Pappa India accident is perhaps an extreme example, but it paints a very clear picture.

[RoyHudd]

I repeat, Juan Post, rubbish. Irrelevant, sensationalist tripe. (Worthy of the BBC is the highest praise I can bestow on your little essay. 0/10)

[skyclamp]

The Job Of Security Should Be To Prevent Terrorism, Not To Prevent Professional Airline Pilots From Doing Their Jobs Properly In The Manner They Are Accustomed To!

[LD Max]

I repeat, Juan Post, rubbish. Irrelevant, sensationalist tripe. (Worthy of the BBC is the highest praise I can bestow on your little essay. 0/10)

I'm struggling for adjectives myself. "Hear Hear" Roy.

[Human Factor]

Juan Post,

No pilot has as yet been linked to radical extremism but that is just historical.

Frankly you are a waste of space. Explain the following based upon the sentence I have quoted above.

How would you intend to prevent a pilot who is linked to radical extremism from causing havoc by banning him from taking a pen or some toothpaste?

In fact, how would you prevent him from causing havoc even if he walked through a security check naked with no bag?

[tornado15]

Just a quick observation. Today I operated a flight from UK to an airport in Europe. We took a 2 hour delay outbound due to backlog of pax through the security search. All pax arrive with their plastic bags full of allowed items. On arriving at said airport for return journey I observe through the window the return pax waiting at the departure gate with their hand luggage, talking on their mobiles and using their portable electronic devices. I ask the dispatcher why the pax had not been made to check in their hand luggage and electronic devices at the desks. He informs me that it is not the procedures for their airport or any airport in their country to do this. I explain to him the current security situation in the UK and the procedures being followed, which he does not care about and tells me that his handling agency and airport security are not employing any of these procedures. Fine I delay the flight as I am not happy about this, ring my operations department in the UK who then inform me that this is fine as only the UK airports are adopting the security procedures. After much discussion about it with ops the handlers and the crew I realise that there is not much I can do other than accept it and board the pax and get the plane back to base.
I hope the information that I was given by my operations manager are correct about the return flights to the UK, but I do not understand why it is only applicable to flights leaving the UK and not returning from Europe. Surely this is defeating the purpose of the whole situation. Any comments or information about the above being incorrect would be appreciated before my next flight to Europe tomorrow.

[Sunfish]

I think perhaps it may be necessary to ditch political correctness..... No muslim pilots and cabin crew (or converts) get to fly in the west. No muslim gets to even touch an aircraft. You can then reduce screening requirements for pilots and cabin crew on the assumption that they are highly unlikely to commit jihad or whatever.

As for pax, I think Israeli style profiling would save a lot of trouble.

I have a distinct impression (which I hope is totally wrong) from reading these and similar posts on Pprune that there is no "depth" to aircraft security measures at all. By depth I mean multiple layers of security. Whats the point of screening passengers and crew when the multitude of caterers, cleaners and engineers routinely carry all manner of articles into and out of an aircraft?

Are you going to look at every meal? Check whats in the vacuum cleaner bag or tool box?

[chandlers dad]

Surely this is defeating the purpose of the whole situation. Any comments or information about the above being incorrect would be appreciated before my next flight to Europe tomorrow.

One suggestion that will help everyone. Next time you land out of the UK, get out of the jet, go inside the terminal and buy a box of pens. Return to the cockpit and place them in one of the bins.

Your fellow fightcrew will really appreciate this!

This situation is truly out of hand...

[Guern]

As I understand it these same procedures are in place for the Channel Islands inter Island flights. So if I want to travel to Jersey (not sure why I would :) ) I would have to check my laptop in to hold luggage for a 15 min flight on an 18 seat Trislander.

Guess it will be the boat for me next time I need to go to Jersey on business!

[d71146]

Just goes to show the differences in interpretation of the rules at different security checkpoints at the same airport. We go through the BAA crew security Southside at Concorde House. Pens allowed Northside but we are not to be trusted with them Southside. Absolute farce and proof, if ever it was needed, that those that apply the interpretation to the rules are doing their best to aid the terrorists by screwing up our jobs and the travel plans of our pax.

Is it me or does that BAA spokesman on tv seems to have a very sniffy attitude.

[GreatCircle]

Tornado 15 - I'll phone a couple of buddies who came in today from 2 northern European airports, and if I get a hold of them, and find anything useful, I'll PM you.

[ACCP]

The answer to this is that, thankfully, the rest of Europe hasn't gone as mad as the British authorities.....yet.

[GreatCircle]

One suggestion that will help everyone. Next time you land out of the UK, get out of the jet, go inside the terminal and buy a box of pens. Return to the cockpit and place them in one of the bins.

Your fellow fightcrew will really appreciate this!

This situation is truly out of hand...

CD - thinking ahead, I just went to the local Office Depot and bought 2 boxes of pens for that very reason....what a farce.

[tornado15]

Thanks, much appreciated. I have been trying to find out but it seems to depend on what airport you are coming from. Has been on my mind since I got back. It is trying to way up the delays and impact to the schedule with doing the right thing!! Nothing like company pressure!!!:ugh:

[GreatCircle]

I think perhaps it may be necessary to ditch political correctness..... No muslim pilots and cabin crew (or converts) get to fly in the west. No muslim gets to even touch an aircraft. You can then reduce screening requirements for pilots and cabin crew on the assumption that they are highly unlikely to commit jihad or whatever.


Well, actually, not true. There are at least 2 I know of at Speedbird, and what about the CO pilot jittery Manchester police took off a service ?

Your faith has nothing to do with it - dubious connections and political views which affect the integrity of your own professionalism and the security of others should - but that has to show up in a vetting process before it is too late.

This is a bit beside the point - we're talking about the current day-to-day issues we all face operationally.

[Rivet gun]

Which is why the there needs to be increased profiling....if the person is already in a position to do harm i.e. being one of the flightdeck crew...no number of scans....metal detectors...body searches, will change this!


I agree absoultly. I may be wrong, but I believe the present procedures involving Disclosure Scotland etc are essentially bureaucratic box ticking, not proper security profiling / vetting by security professionals. Furtheremore there are many pilots operaitng from UK bases who do not have aircrew ID cards because their securtiy checking is incomplete, nevertheless they can still operate for many months being allowed through security on the basis of their Pilot's licence and a passport.

The solution would be to make proper security vetting mandatory prior to issue of the first type rating (i.e aircraft over 5700 Kg). Implement common standards throughout JAA states and have the vetting done by the security service of the pilots country of nationality.

[ivor toolbox]

Go one step futher and make it one procedure for all flight crews worldwide.

As you get your medical renewed your send a copy and are given an ID from that? No current first class medical and no ID?

How can this be made to work but the above is correct, we need to do something and make it stick, if not only for the UK but would be nice to have something worldwide.

Simple really, place the issuing of ID cards with your friendly neighbourhood regulatory body, aka CAA/FAA/Transport Canada (insert name here) , after all don't they (sic) send us our licences, all with their own unique number?
Secondly take it away from the individual airports many of whom use the issue of an ID card as a means to generate extra revenue..yes thats' right folks..they charge for them.

And finally IMHO, in UK, Airport Security should be taken back into a civil service function, with properly trained and educated screeners,rather than the low paid 'RentaGoon' we get now, and independant of any Airport 'management' whom think their interpretation of 'The Rules' is more restrictive so it must be better.

Rant Over

Ps .... pens now allowed as 'essential for our job', but still no toolboxes or engine oils,hydraulic oils,oxygen or nitrogen....ho hum!

[Rivet gun]

This is a bit beside the point - we're talking about the current day-to-day issues we all face operationally.

I think if we were all better vetted we would, from TRANSEC's perspective, be a much more controlled risk and therefore it would easier to justify more appropriate controls at the validation points.

[GreatCircle]

Ps .... pens now allowed as 'essential for our job', but still no toolboxes or engine oils,hydraulic oils,oxygen or nitrogen....ho hum!

You mean I went and spent $20 on cartons of pens for no reason ? I better get on ebay pronto.

And yes, if politics wasn't an absolute limiting factor on the ID discussion, a fine idea.

[Rivet gun]

And finally IMHO, in UK, Airport Security should be taken back into a civil service function, with properly trained and educated screeners,rather than the low paid 'RentaGoon' we get now, and independant of any Airport 'management' whom think their interpretation of 'The Rules' is more restrictive so it must be better.


Actually we could now have an excellent opportunity to push for this. I believe that there is a move to create a new integrated "border police" combining airport police, customs and immigration. The security screeners might need to be a separate (lower paid?) grade, but they could still come under the operational control of the border police in the same way that traffic wardens and PCSOs come under the control of the local police.

[groundhogbhx]

Don't forget the ground staff are getting hammered too. Last week they didn't let food through at all one morning delaying all the airside staff as they had to find somewhere secure to put it, or eat it, before going through. The result was that by 10.00 we were getting ready to walk out, just as the policy changed. We also have problems of staff not being able to bring radios through:ooh: How are you supposed to keep in touch and get your flight out in reasonable time if you can't communicate. It seems that something changes every day, yesterday watches and belts were ok but today they have to go through the x-ray. I followed a crew through the other day that were told they couldn't take knives and forks through with them but spoons were ok, now maybe I'm missing the point here but I would have thought you could do as much damage or more with a spoon handle than you could with the prongs on a fork:ugh:

[lexxity]

Furtheremore there are many pilots operaitng from UK bases who do not have aircrew ID cards because their securtiy checking is incomplete, nevertheless they can still operate for many months being allowed through security on the basis of their Pilot's licence and a passport.

Now that is the maddest thing I have read all day. I have just returned to work after maternity leave and my airside pass has been parked for the duration. My actual pass doesn't expire until next summer, so my employers sent me to the pass office with the appropriate letter to get my airside reactivated. Security have refused to do so because I have had too long off work and my company "haven't sorted it properly. Get them to call us." :confused: :ouch: Madness.

[tristar500]

Groundhogbhx - WORD UP!!! I hear what youre saying. EDI has had the food problems too. Staff not allowed any food/drink through staff search area to go airside. Some dispatchers and groundstaff on double shifts, with their own prepared food, having to leave it in effect for the bin and go hungry until their employers 'kindly' agreed to provide them with refreshment vouchers (this lasted only a few hours and the offer was withdrawn...)

A captain even refused to fly his sector unless he was allowed to take his paracetamol with him... Stranger still, cabin crews (female) were prevented from taking makeup through:confused:

Its all gone a bit 'Pete-Tong':ok:

[daz211]

Would it not be a good idea for airlines such as BA and VS
to opp some of the flights from other south east airports
rather than canx them all together i understand that LHR
is getting snarled up so what would the problem be in
opp from lets say STN just for a few weeks :confused:

[sky9]

I would have thought that the question that really needs to be asked is what is the security vetting of the security staff at Heathrow?

I would have thought that MI5 have got their knickers in a twist on that one at the present time although the politicians and the press are strangely quiet.

[xetroV]

Pilots and aircrew should expect no special treatment other than the ability to fast track a queue.
The only treatment that's being asked is for aircrew and groundcrew to be able to simply do their jobs. That requires a pen, for starters. And it requires controlling an aircraft that can potentially be used as a bomb, with or without a pen. If you can't grasp even that basic logic, then I sincerely pity you.

[daz211]

what i dont get is that the flight deck have full control of the
aircraft and they would not need gels or bombs to down an
aircraft
I say give em the sandwiches and as many pens as they want
there the last people i would want p*ss off

[Human Factor]

what i dont get is that the flight deck have full control of the
aircraft and they would not need gels or bombs to down an
aircraft


You and every airline pilot in the UK.:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[daz211]

what are your unions doing about all this ?

[Chilli Monster]

Only an idea but - why not carry a copy of the DFT statement with you and see what happens.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/pdf/dft_about_pdf_612280.pdf

I've read it several times. It doesn't say Aircrew, it doesn't say Airside Workers.

It only says, in several places, Passengers.

So - why are any of us being subjected to this at all? Has nobody thought of pointing this out to the airports yet?

[LD Max]

So - why are any of us being subjected to this at all? Has nobody thought of pointing this out to the airports yet?

Regardless of any public "statements", TRANSEC is responsible for Airport Security. The supposed procedure is outlined here (http://www.balpa.org/BALPA Security Briefing 10 August 2006.htm).

But it doesn't work like this either. :rolleyes:

[Deal or No deal]

Don't forget the ground staff are getting hammered too

Aren't they just!!

Delays have put everything out of sync, causing more delays as the normal working pattern of shifts doesn't cater for this.. Who wants to work overtime??? Hands up??:rolleyes:

Food on Thursday was a BIG gripe..... Now allowed if it's solid..... Is butter or margerine solid?? Jam?? Sarnies getting through though!! Luckily!!:D

12 hours without food on hand in the 5 mins between a/c is a little unreal... Letting people go though, back to their cars to eat for half hour or so only added to the delays..... Ground crew generally don't get 'breaks', if there's no a/c needing attention, then you can sit!!! With such a backlog of a/c, you've no chance..:=

Purchasing food at airport prices, even with a bit of discount, would bankrupt anyone at any level!!:*

Plus, bags now weigh a little more, and there are more of them to process..... Check in takes a little longer, security screening, loading...
The belt system at CWL KEEPS throwing a wobbly... Every morning normally, but now?? Well I'm supprised it copes at all!!! Having an airport duty manager stare at the belt backloged for an hour doesn't make a shed of difference!! Why they do it I don't know.... Makes them look pro-active???? SPEND SOME MONEY ON A BETTER SYSTEM!!:ugh:

CWL today have banned anything to do with smoking!! It was ok on thursday, friday and saturday to take cigarets, tobaco and cigars through, but come today, OH NO!! Yet some got through..... security can literaly open a door 10 feet away from them and see the smoking area in bagage..... How many people smoking there I wonder???!!!!:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

The effectiveness of this new screening is unbalanced and changes per shift..... A little thought goes a long way!!!

So does everything come off a vehicle going airside to be screened?? I think not.... How do you x-ray or taste test de-icing fluid on an artic?? Thankfully we are a few months ahead of that scenario!!!:O

Security have it hard at the mo, they're only doing their job as told... So respect to them for taking our flack day in day out!!!

Back to the grind! Looking forward to the day that a/c are grounded coz engineers can't get the liquids / gasses needed.. And suddenly, within an hour, the rules will change..... again!!!!:E

[t-bag]

Sorry, to go backaway, the security "north side" at lgw refered to by 30W is through jubilee house and is done by securicor paid for, I believe by BA .... (not BAA security) possilbly hence the different attitude.I went through today with normal flight bag + lap top, no problem at all.

[Farty Flaps]

Tornado ,
Most downroute airports are operating normally.
To your satement add this.
Waiting for push at Man today a PIA 747 from Karachi pulls up and disgorges its pax , all with hand baggage as normal.
Wasnt one of the suspects arrested in Pakistan?The ones here mostly of pakistan origin. Most of my pax were palin old white hiloday makers that are clearly potential Terrorists
I conclude with...Whats the feckin point. This country is on its arse. Oh wait maybe it was only the vast majority of decent muslims that were on that flight.But wait a minute , what about the ordinary decent vast majority of english people dicked around for political gain.Plot ...My arse. Theyll all be out in a week.:*
Up side.The man security are generally being very reasonable at crew search, and its not their fault. I think i wont return with any hand baggage on my next flight or maybe i'll be held personnaly responsible for allowing a breach of uk aircraft security. The airport maybe foreign but the aircraft is british territory and you will be in command over britain in breach of the regs....watch your backs for the first scapegoat captain.

[Flap15Geardown]

The security staff were chatting yesterday while I was putting my shoes back on after the usual x-ray. They were saying how other staff were changing the proceedures as they were told about them while others were only implementing the changes once they had got it in writing:ugh: No wonder there is so much uproar from the staff if things like that are going on.

Talking to some despatchers the other day and found out that one staff gate wouldn't let mobiles through and the other wouldn't let the girls bring perfume through. Answer was to drop what they could bring through in the office, go back and collect what was confiscated and come back through the other gate, what is the sense in that. Now, if they all worked to the same rules it would be easier to cope with but when they are all working differently and you don't know what you are going to get until you get to security it's hardly suprising that people are starting to lose their wrag. Lets hope that the down grade of security to severe will also inject a little common sense.:ok:

[Johnbr]

arrived in N.Y. JFK few hours ago and everything semms to be as usual...No stress,everyone going through immigration very swiftly,secutity agents not seen anywhere,no weapons insight...very normal indeed...Out of MIA,coleagues told me all as usual...weird...Notebooks,cellphones,pens,palmtops,flightbag s all allowed...At least for flightcrew...

[Flight Training News]

Dear PPRuNe,

The newspaper Flight Training News will be printing shortly, but we considered that this article by Lembit Öpik MP should be made public asap. We apologise for the length of this post, but feel your forum to be the most appropriate place to publish Lembit's comments prior to our newspaper print run, and believe your members will be interested to read what he has to say concerning the alleged terrorist plot to attack commercial airliners.

The article is reproduced below.

With best regards from Flight Training News.

Ban the flightdeck - Lembit Öpik MP

“In view of the present threat it would appear that the flight deck should not be allowed on the aircraft. The plane does not fly and everyone is safe. That is until a catering truck runs into it.” These are the words of a commercial pilot, expressing his feelings about the uncompromising new security rules imposed at Britain’s airports on 10th August this year. These rules were announced hours after claims that a plot for the destruction of around 10 civilian airliners scheduled to take-off from British airports loaded with passengers, fuel and crew, had been prevented. The news has widely covered the consequences on civilian air travel. The searching, checking and re-checking of people, possessions and baggage caused the cancellation of 30% of journeys. Hundreds of thousands of passengers waited for hours, many even for days, as flights failed to take-off, or departed with only a tiny number of passengers. Fare paying passengers were consigned to tents and over-crowded terminal buildings in scenes reminiscent of refugees fleeing a war zone.

Those lucky enough to get on the planes couldn’t take on normal hand baggage; only what they were permitted to carry in demeaning see through plastic bags. Whether or not there WAS a terrorist plot – and at time of writing (August 14th 2006) this is far from clear – there’s no doubt the threat of terrorism partially paralysed our airways by the resulting security measures. Now here’s the crazy bit. Initially, these same regulations were applied to the aircrew. Almost everything imposed on passengers was also imposed on the people who were flying them. That’s right. The folks on the flight deck were being barred from carrying anything from their laptops to beverages, food, even their car immobilisers. One pilot has observed: “All my notes are on my laptop and my PDA. No paper manuals anymore! What about torches for walk-arounds? Hearing protection? The yellow – “don’t hit me” – jacket? The TWO pairs of glasses? Pens? Wizz-wheel? Calculators? All needed…” but mainly banned, unless the flight crew were willing to negotiate, in the hope that the security staff would see sense.

Think about it. In August 2006, anyone in the UK getting on a plane was being treated as if they might be a terrorist, regardless of their role, their credentials and whether they were just along for the ride or actually flying the plane! I’m sure you’ve already seen the flaw in this. To quote another aircrew professional: “If the crew wanted to do some serious injury I seem to remember (they made a film about this, unless that is outlawed now) that pointing the nose at the ground and trying to break the sound barrier makes a big hole.” Yup. You don’t need a torch to torch the aircraft, an inescapable fact which makes the restrictions on aircrew relatively absurd. The pilots weren’t being allowed to take their car immobiliser on board in case they used it to commit an act of terrorism, but were trusted with the lives of 500 people seven miles up at 550 mph with nobody to check up on them.

What happens next? Well, hopefully common sense prevails, with a continuing reduction of the rules imposed on aircrew. But even though this now appears to be happening, but there’s no guarantee that this indicates a more measured approach will be taken again in the future. Also, there’s a real danger that those of us who fly the small stuff may end up attracting the same attentions as the big jets. I mean, why think the security crackdown will stop in the big cockpits? Surely the small ones are a risk as well? It’s easy to see such “mission creep” thinking invading all aspects of aviation, until we spend more time proving we’re not intending to do something stupid than we do proving we can fly safely in the first place. They’re already talking about giving would-be pilots mental tests to see if a terrorist lurks inside.

Now think this through, and be blunt about this. What’s more dangerous - a runaway Piper Cherokee or a runaway train? A crashing Cessna 150, or a crashing bus? A crazed microlight pilot, or a crazy ship’s captain? The unavoidable logic of the ever-tightening noose of security leads directly and quickly into a police state where we have to prove our mental credentials before we are allowed to do anything which could be used to harm anyone else. And that doesn’t leave a lot, does it? Certainly, anyone who buys fertiliser should be checked out – they might not growing turnips – they might be building a bomb. And how about that chap who’s just bought a gallon of petrol in a can? Refilling his lawn mower… or preparing Molotov cocktails in the garden shed? And hey, the local radio control aircraft modellers could easily be constructing a miniature squadron to flower bomb the local traffic warden. Even in the darkest days of the Cold War between America and Russia, such paranoia didn’t persistently invade the everyday lives of people in the West. What has happened – though for understandable reasons, it must be said - is a very real compromising of our civil liberties. That’s because politicians have used only one defence against terrorism: attempting to prevent the opportunity to terrorise. But to guarantee no more air terrorism using this route, you really would have to ban the flightdeck.

The answer is not to abandon airport security measures. The answer lies in risk management. Proportionate response. Informed decision-making. Manageable measures which balance the risk and the cost. Risk management, not risk elimination, is the sensible approach. For example, flight crew should to be allowed to do the job they’ve spent years training for. Decision-makers should apply different regs to pilots. Light aviation must not be singled out simply because they’re up in the sky.

And there’s another thing. The strategy itself. How on earth can the Government seriously believe that, simply by trying to apprehend the terrorists, they’ll remove the underlying terrorist threat? The lessons in Northern Ireland showed that defusing the motives of terrorism largely delivered more progress than 30 years of counter-terrorism did on its own. Both elements were important, but with international terrorism, Ministers are only concerned with checking everyone who gets on a plane rather than figuring out why some people board for the wrong reasons. Dissolving motives is not giving in to terrorists, but offers a way to truly reduce the chance of an attack in the first place. I know Ministers read Flight Training News. So, here’s a direct appeal to you. Please, before “next time,” keep talking to aircrew, who take life and death decisions in the flightdeck throughout their working lives. Make realistic plans with airports and airlines NOW, not during the next alleged plot, when the temptation for knee-jerk over-reaction is obviously greater.

Long term, the solution isn’t found in turning Heathrow into an overcrowded shanty town of frustrated travellers, let alone extending that to the smaller airfields of Britain. It needs to be much more sophisticated than that. Sure, it’s scary to manage risk, but politics IS hard, and the challenge is having proportionate responses, before managing public expectations regarding risk. And for goodness sake, look at the motives of the terrorists, not at every pilot and passenger as if they have motives to terrorise. Another professional sums it up: “those of us who fly long haul will not be allowed to take anything such as shampoo, toothpaste, deodorant etc. We will not be allowed to take our car keys if they have electronic fobs. The obvious anomaly in all this is that once we have left those things behinds, we are then given control of a multi million dollar potential weapon of mass destruction and trusted to keep it secure and operate it safely.”

No pilot – professional, non-professional or student – is more likely to do evil just because they’ve got a flying bag in the cockpit. So, before Government again acts in haste, tell us either why banning pilot bags in cockpits and extra searches on aircrew is vital, or be a bit smarter in a crisis and preserve their freedom to do their job.

[captjns]

Any word on overnight bags for crews in addition to their flight bags?

[30W]

I would suggest that any operting crew member, using a crew search facility now just takes whatever they require, as long as no liquids are carried. If you have an overnight bag in addition, then so be it. Seems to me rules for us now read life as before, minus any liquids...............

30W

[ray cosmic]

Well, there is someone who wrote down what most have een thinking..:ok:
Standardized aircrew id would be a good start, so you know the uniformed guyin front of you is indeed a genuine pilot. Now a genuine pilot would not do crazy things, and as long as he's carrying a decent amount of stuff he might need, you should leave him alone and focus on other security holes outside the public eye.
I know its a nice show to almost strip down a pilot or cabin crew in front of the travelling public, but the gain from that investment in time and money doesn't really pay off in increased safety.
Just my view. Pilots are no Gods, certainly not. But sometimes they have to jump to a couple too many hoops to be able to execute their actual profession.

[Human Factor]

It isn't often I agree with a Liberal Democrat!! :ok:

Let's hope it rattles some cages.

[alibaba]

I agree totally. :ok:

There does need to be a standard of security to be maintained though of all crews and engineers etc. It is with security towards airside employees, there is no thought what so ever put behind any of the measures.

There is a certain amount of respect in other countries though for your position. On the continent for example Italy and Spain, security will generally use a bit of common sense when you pass through. They realise that if you wanted to commit a grievous act, you could.

I had a discussion with security from a UK airport a couple of days ago."Ooooohhhhh do you know that you have a fork in your bag? We will have to take that off you."

Erm, of cause I know I packed it with my food.

I continued to ask if the security guard would come up to the flight deck and stop me pointing the aircraft at terra firma. Also would the guard help me to decide if I should use the fork as a weapon against myself or the axe that sits beside me in the flight deck?

I kept my fork. :D

Common sense seems to be something of a past generation. :(

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Well.... I'm very impressed. An MP who has read these pages, listened and understood. An MP who obviously understands the concepts of probability and consequences within the context of risk management. I'll be interested to read the original source of this article (hey, he's actually quoted ME :ok: ).

Now, if you guys can spare him, can we have this bloke to be Prime Minister of Australia, please?

[CargoOne]

Standardised crew ID is not that easy to introduce as it may look. It is no problem to agree on size/layout, but it hardly makes any sense without possibility for security staff to check it onsite through some kind of wordlwide database, and introduction of such database can take ages especially if it needs to be truly worldwide.
I hate to say this but it takes a couple of weeks to become a cabin crew, and cabin crew have access to cockpit... Same goes for airside handling staff. Situation is different for the pilots (as they are in cockpit and have controls anyway) but would it make sense to make different security rules for ATPL holders and all others? And how a deadheading crews should be treated then?

[egbt]

Well.... I'm very impressed. An MP read these pages, listened and understood, has responded (actually quoted ME) and makes incredible sense? Unheard of here downunder.
Can we have this bloke to be Prime Minister of Australia, please?

Probably helps that he has a PPL (MEP?), but I have to say I am also impressed :ok:

Edit:

http://www.libdems.org.uk/party/people/mr-lembit-opik.html

On April 13th 1998 Lembiut came close to death in a near fatal para-gliding accident. He fell some 80 feet onto a Welsh mountain in his constituency, and broke his back in 12 places, as well as his ribs, sternum and jaw. This near-death experience has caused him to take a keen interest in the Spinal Injuries Association, of which he is a member. Despite the accident, he continues with his interest in aviation. He holds a pilot's licence and speaks for British Gliding in the House of Commons. Lembit also rides motorcycles and lobbies for the interests of bikers when occasion arises.

[MaxReheat]

At last, a voice of reason in public from one of our politicians who echos the sentiments voiced against the beaurocratic deaf ears by flightcrew since September 11th. Mr Opik should be encouraged to pursue our case onto the floor of the House of Commons (as and when MPs return from hols) where our daily farcical experiences can be revealed to the public and given the full blast of publicity. So, let's keep the ball rolling and get the whole question of our place in the security system well and truly established - as part of it (and treated accordingly) and not part of the problem.

Well done Mr Opik - and shame on BALPA for its gutless performance over the past 5 years on this matter.

[chandlers dad]

Excellent! Now lets get the other people in a position of power to see this and thinking the same way!

CD

[Gnirren]

I'm flying in to work out of Stansted soon, does anyone know if they allow cellphones and laptops and the like again or what's the story there? I'm not to thrilled about leaving my phone since I couldn't be reached if they call me in from standby.

[Chimbu chuckles]

I cleared through a crew checkpoint/security room this morning at LHR...as a foreign longhaul crew memmber.

I will say up front that the security staff were wonderfully understanding of our frustrations...they seemed to, for perhaps the first time in my experience of this security lunacy, TRULY empathise.

However.

We were not allowed to have glasses cases in our nav bags...they had to be removed to our hold baggage...no cigarettes or lighters. No laptops for the cabin crew they also to be put in hold luggage.

My nav bag was 'searched' but no mention made of my Laptop (other than it went through the xray separately) Mobile phone, torch, car keys (including immobiliser fob)....just my spare reading glasses in their small tube style case and my sunnies case of the soft fake leather variety which opens up across the top had to be transfered into my hold luggage...interesting she missed another spare set:ok:

To her credit when I muttered "for fecks sake!" under my breath she merely, quietly, asked me not to swear at her...I appologised and assured her it was not directed at her in any way shape or form.

The other tech crew member's wife was travelling and she was forced to buy a small case in the terminal into which her mobile and handbag were placed to go in the hold...she just barely managed to hold on to her wallet with all her cash, credit cards etc....GBP20 for the new bag:ugh:

If they had tried to take my pen, mobile, laptop etc then I was off back to the pub. But they did not and I was so impressed with their general demeanor I felt compelled to thank them all and wish them a nice day...that is definately a first when it comes to security personel. More usually I smile through gritted teeth and leave quickly before I drop myself in it with the fleet office.

While our reading/sun glass glasses were deemed potentially deadly dangerous items I, once again, took my seat at the controls of 185000 kg of aeroplane,people and fuel and managed to restrain myself from taking the crash axe to all and sundry prior to rolling inverted and diving into the channel...and they even gave us metal knives and forks to eat our crew meal with:rolleyes:

Well done to the T2 crew security people you deserve a pat on the back....to the utter morons who think up this **** I wouldn't pi$$ on you if you were on fire:mad:

[BusyB]

I really hate to state the obvious but, it seems its necessary. Anyone who is intending to martyr himself with the contents of his hand baggage will be equally happy to martyr himself with his hold (checked in ) baggage which is not as intensively checked.:ugh:

Where is this in securities calculations? Obviously, lets give the flightcrew a hard time as thats what everyone is giving us!!:confused:

[Genghis the Engineer]

I really hate to state the obvious but, it seems its necessary. Anyone who is intending to martyr himself with the contents of his hand baggage will be equally happy to martyr himself with his hold (checked in ) baggage which is not as intensively checked.:ugh:


Except it is:

(1) Still very extensively checked, they just aren't interested in hand-held weapons.

(2) Not accessible for him or her to do anything with (bear in mind that he's already been relieved of anything resembling a remote control)

(3) In a separate hold designed so that any fire or explosion should not impinge upon either the pressurised cabin, or any primary structure or systems.


This doesn't take away from the very valid points that aircrew don't need a bomb or nailfile to kill everybody on the aeroplane.

G

[Nearly Nigel]

I really hate to state the obvious but, it seems its necessary. Anyone who is intending to martyr himself with the contents of his hand baggage will be equally happy to martyr himself with his hold (checked in ) baggage which is not as intensively checked.:ugh: I'm as much an advocate as anyone else for Flight Crew having special rules and being a 'special case' but the issue you quote above BusyB is missing the point.

To get an IED that will actually go off into the hold requires it to be smuggled all the way into the hold whilst fully assembled and ready to detonate.

The current measures are designed to stop people from smuggling stuff on board that is otherwise unable to be identified/differentiated from normal organic liquids. These bits themselves look innocuous and only form part of an operationally ready IED anyway. Someone else has to smuggle the other parts (detonator & timer) on board and they then have to be assembled whilst on board.

Three martyrs smuggling single and otherwise innocuous looking pieces of an IED was easier to pull off under the security regime that existed last week than one martyr with a fully completed and functional one already in his hold loaded suitcase.

None of this makes any difference to my ability to wreak havoc with the 60 tonnes of guided missile under my command without the need for an IED whether smuggled whole, assembled on board or anything else you care to mention.

I feel I should be trusted. Simple as that.

If I am not, then why do they let me fly the darned things?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

" If I am not, then why do they let me fly the darned things? "

And even more important how long is it going to be before no self respecting crew mamber " wants " to fly the damn things?

The inmates seem to be running the asylum in todays world of aviation.

Chuck E.

[chandlers dad]

I feel I should be trusted. Simple as that.

If I am not, then why do they let me fly the darned things?

Totally agree and this is the point that the govt and security is missing. They will sit their friends and family in the very same jet after strip searching you, trusting you to get them there and back, and not ever think of how stupid they are in their procedures.

Its time to talk to our unions, representatives and media. They either trust us or not. If not then I can get a job anywhere. They can take the train or ship to vacation for a while then bet there will be a massive change of heart!

[BigWhiteRat]

I sometime can't believe some of the things posted both on this thread. Guys and Gals - it's not personal - nobody want to be screened at security - it's not a slur on your fine upstanding ethics - it's not that everyone wants to demean you because "You're a pilot" or "You're aircrew" - it's not lets bring them down a peg or two.

In three words - IT'S NOT PERSONAL :=:=:=:=

The Governments of UK, US , Sinagapore and India have all determined that additional requirements for security are needed and have mandated that this should occur as additional screening and restrictions on cabin baggage

The next time you "fang off" at the person accepting luggage, a ground staff member, security screener or your ops people, just remember it is building the animosity you so vocally believe has been inflicted on you.:=:=:=:=:=:=

Everyone in the airline industry is in the same flooding boat and it would help if EVERYONE bails the water out.:ugh:

[LD Max]

In three words - IT'S NOT PERSONAL :=:=:=:=

The Governments of UK, US , Sinagapore and India have all determined that additional requirements for security are needed and have mandated that this should occur as additional screening and restrictions on cabin baggage.

Oh that's okay then. I'm sorry, but I really had no idea these security procedures were actually so important. :eek: I thought they were just being done to p*ss us off. I'm so relieved, now that I know there must be a good reason pilots aren't allowed to carry spectacle cases, or toffee crisps and totally reasurred that these perfectly reasonable measures are being implemented by the UK, US , Sinagapore and India. I shall look forward to the rest of the world joining in so that this totally ineffective and moronic bullsh*t system may at least be consistently applied

In fact, Danny said it so much better than me:

It is high time that Balpa and our representatives exposed these sham security rules for what they are. Just some half witted mandarin making up petty and useless rules to justify their existence with equally inept and stupid people interpreting the rules without thought or regard for the effects they have. If we don't stop them now they will have done the terrorists job for them and they are jeopardising our jobs in the process.

This is not security. This is ineptitude and absolute dumbing down. They are as bad as the terrorists themselves and deserve nothing but contempt. Either we are trusted or we aren't. :D

(I wish I could write like that!)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Danny has just about summed it up.

How many productive intelligent bureaucrats do you know?

[Halfnut]

Many years ago my carrier showed a video of some jolly ol chap from LHR operations in our security class. He discussed the security issues in place at LHR and said the “Staff” knows the good guys from the bad guys when it comes to the crews. In the video he said the “Staff” was unable to differentiate between the carriers because the bad guy’s carriers would complain about how the “Staff” had handled their crews. So they treat everyone the same no matter the country of origin.

At the time it seemed fair but now it has gone to far. Getting the “Full Monty” every time I go to work was bad enough but now the lunacy of it all is beyond what a rational person should be expected to endure. The “Staff” at LHR and every other airport needs to have two security protocols for flight crews: one for the rouge nations and one for the civilized nations. If they know who the troublemakers are then the “Staff” should single them out for increased scrutiny.

I feel an ear infection coming on. I hope I get over it by Christmas.

[Loose rivets]

- it's not that everyone wants to demean you because "You're a pilot" or "You're aircrew" - it's not lets bring them down a peg or two.

In three words - IT'S NOT PERSONAL :=:=:=:=


After witnessing 40 years of the profession being degraded to that of a laborer, I have learned to recognize a snigger thank you.

However, I agree wholeheartedly with....

Everyone in the airline industry is in the same flooding boat and it would help if EVERYONE bails the water out.

[xetroV]

Everyone in the airline industry is in the same flooding boat and it would help if EVERYONE bails the water out.:ugh:
Problem is: current so-called "security measures" achieve the opposite, bailing the water in.

[BOAC]

Well, I made it through CWL yesterday with the necessary equipment to operate a European (NB not US carrier transatlantic) flight, pushing past my poor passengers with their pitiful plastic bags (who thought 'it was all over'), dutifully removed my shoes (yes, the same ones I might use to tweak the rudder pedals on my aircraft to ensure an accurate line up on my deathly dive onto my 'target'), but:-

1) CWL has withdrawn the dedicated 'crew' screening area - against the DofT guidelines - why?

2) Our flight boarded at FNC for the return, as do all European return flights, with the usual enormous volume of carry on bags, laptops, mobiles (one assumes also bottles of highly explosive liquids) etc, and then overflew the south western UK (and who knew we were not actually planning to overfly London and dive into Buckingham Palace with our biros?) on its way to CWL.

If we have to knee-jerk in a senseless fashion to US paranoia over supposed attacks on 3 US tranatlantic carriers, why do we not have ALL UK airports operating such flights made to institute dedicated check-in/screening as El Al have done for years? They understood 'the threat' and reacted in a timely and sensible manner.

There is no logic in what Genghis says about the time required to 'activate' a new security ruling - any management worth its title would have

a) seen this coming
b) had a plan in place to notify the oncoming shift of the changes - a matter of hours at the maximum
c) ensured uniformity in the first place in the application of the rules

I await ?news? of the efforts of our pilot unions/associations in having this state of dementure sorted out. I generally abhor 'public enquiries' but feel we need some analysis of this.

I will never deny we need security for our passengers on their flights - I want it very much for me and my crew too. We just need it done sensibly and in a way that recognises practicalities and allows the industry to turn its wheels.

As a 'footnote' I was warned by the handling agent as I left the aircraft at CWL to return home that I might need to remove my shoes to re-enter the airport from the apron?

[BOAC]

Once again, posters are advised that IAW Danny's warning at posts #158 and 184 and my reminder at #395, this thread is being kept focussed as best as we can on issues affecting crew. Other posts are either deleted or moved to http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238932 or are in http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238387 which has now been closed.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

I may have misread or misunderstood some of the recent posts but, correct me if I'm wrong (and you usually do!); the 2 main binds are:

a the driver having the same constraints as the self-loaders. The driver, if so minded, being able to convert an aeroplane into a guided missile, even if stark bo**ock naked and without carry-ons.

b even low risk PAX/Crews on low risk routes are being screened.

A little trip into paranoia can provide a scenario where a low risk body could be coerced to carry devices/substances to hand over to a high risk body, airside. Something like, "pass this on to Mr X and the next time you see your wife and kids, they may not be in a number of plastic bags". Outrageously far fetched but there are some really nasty buggers out there. Just a thought, for what it's worth.

I do agree that we will do the Terr's job for him if we overreact to events.

[MReyn24050]

Once again, posters are advised that IAW Danny's warning at posts #158 and 184 and my reminder at #395, this thread is being kept focussed as best as we can on issues affecting crew. Other posts are either deleted or moved to http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238932 or are in http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=238387 which has now been closed.
BOAC forgive me for posting this but after 50 years in the aviation industry I just felt I had to express my feelings.
I am totally amazed, as I am sure all people in the airline industry are, that the industry is still being subjected to knee-jerk reactions as far as airline security is concerned. What amazes me most, from what I have read, is the way that you, the Air Crew, are being treated. I just cannot believe that you are being put through such ridiculous, insulting and futile procedures. Surely there is somebody in the security chain with some common sense to see the damage all this is causing to the industry.
This year is as we all know is the fifth anniversary of 9/11 and yet passenger profiling is nowhere nearer being introduced. I am sure that this is all to do with the Government being scared of being accused of introducing discriminatory profiling. However I do not think that race, religion or national origin are factors. I feel that the factors that should be considered are frequency of travel to certain destinations, the reason for the passenger’s journey, whether the passenger is a member of the airline’s frequent flyer program, and whether the ticket was bought with cash or a credit card. I am sure that terrorists would not participate in a program or use methods of payment that would reveal aspects of their identity.
Any profiling system should focus on those who are more likely to pose a threat, elderly women, disabled passengers, and children, are not the sort of people who are likely to pose a terrorist threat.
Passengers who fit the profile would I am sure never know that they had been selected. With the correct use of computers and experienced security personnel it should be possible to screen passengers, after all they must all have purchased a ticket or had a ticket purchased on their behalf, and then identify those that require subjection to additional security at the entry into the departure lounge and again when boarding.
I believe work is under way in the USA to establish a computer network linking every reservation system in the U.S. to private and government databases. It is intended that the computer network would use data-mining and predictive software to profile passengers and look for potential threats. Whether that is practical I have no idea but something has to be done before the whole of the airline industry grinds to a halt.
Sorry just the views of a grumpy old man.

[Globaliser]

I feel I should be trusted. Simple as that.

If I am not, then why do they let me fly the darned things?Speaking as SLF, I'm very happy to trust you.

But I'm not happy to trust the security screeners to reliably identify every person who is aircrew, and every person who is not aircrew but who is pretending to be.

[scroggs]

What difference does it make? If they get through security masquerading as a pilot, they still don't need anything extra to kill you!

[Globaliser]

What difference does it make? If they get through security masquerading as a pilot, they still don't need anything extra to kill you!I was rather hoping that even those masquerading as pilots wouldn't actually get onto the flight deck, and that the operating pilots might just recognise an interloper.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Perhaps, just perhaps, we should return to an idea that I heard talked about maybe half a dozen years ago. Rather than initially concentrating upon the suspicious characters, concentrate initially upon those who aren't.

It's a reasonable bet, for example, that company aircrew, government ministers, serving members of your own police and armed forces will not try and do anything stupid that'll endanger an aircraft. If there can be some form of ID/vetting scheme to fast-track these people (and maybe we can apply for an opt-in to such a scheme) - albeit still with some reasonable security checking, it would free up the security officials to concentrate upon those who can't make such proof. This has an added advantage that you aren't targetting particular ethnic groups quite so visibily (okay, you might be, but not visibly).

G

[Genghis the Engineer]

I was rather hoping that even those masquerading as pilots wouldn't actually get onto the flight deck, and that the operating pilots might just recognise an interloper.

They wouldn't need to would they, just in contact with somebody boarding the aeroplane to pass stuff to them.

G

[beaver eager]

I was rather hoping that even those masquerading as pilots wouldn't actually get onto the flight deck, and that the operating pilots might just recognise an interloper.A 'proper' check of suitability (not this stupid Disclosure Scotland nonsense which could render you 'unsuitable' for an airside pass if you have a punch-up in a pub - what's that got to do with terrorism FFS?) and the issuing of a 'proper' airside pass with microchip and biometric data included would render the chance of an interloper getting through as almost impossible.

Oh! But that would cost money. Hang on.... Doesn't Disclosure Scotland cost money too?

[chandlers dad]

Speaking as SLF, I'm very happy to trust you.
But I'm not happy to trust the security screeners to reliably identify every person who is aircrew, and every person who is not aircrew but who is pretending to be.

Once the pilots make it through the security BS, they then proceed to the gate. They are met with a ramp agent who has a list of flight crew assigned to each flight. Their names are checked off with the list and each flight crew member must show a company ID. Without this they are not allowed on the flight, no matter what ID or uniform they have.

Someone could buy, steal or make a uniform, scrounge some wings and epaulette's and bodge up a fake ID, but once inside security they would never be allowed on an airplane as their name is not on the list, with one exception. There are times that I travel in uniform (going home and too tired or no time to change) and am let on the airplane only because I have a valid ticket. You have two choices to get on the plane, as certified flight crew or SLF with a ticket.

As well for some silly reason walking down the jetway my epaulette's usually dissappear into my pocket. Usually has something with needing to have an adult beverage on the way home...

[beaver eager]

Once the pilots make it through the security BS, they then proceed to the gate. They are met with a ramp agent who has a list of flight crew assigned to each flight. Their names are checked off with the list and each flight crew member must show a company ID. Without this they are not allowed on the flight, no matter what ID or uniform they have.Funnily enough, this is already what seems to be in place when passing through security at Italian nightstops. The single policeman sitting at the scanner, who then waves us through (some of the time, at least) without checking us closely when we set the metal detector arch off, appears to check our names off against a list on a piece of paper he has.

Presumably these are local procedures insisted upon by the Italian authorities, but they seem to work and allow a more er 'pragmatic' approach to crew search procedures.

I would advocate such measures be put in place for all flights where the crew have a need to pass through security. This could easily then be extended to include crew on positioning flights too.

It can't be that difficult to implement as they seem able to cope in Italy and, of course, have to supply the names of every passenger too on flights to the USA. Again - no problem when the alternative would be to cancel the flights and just shut up shop.

If only they cared about their crews as much as their profits. :mad:

[Halfnut]

http://aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm

TSA's Rule: No Shirt. No Shoes. Now You Can Fly

US Aviation Security: Stupidity As An Art Form

There's no doubt about it. The bad guys are planning to hit us again.

The foiled UK plot is just one example. Not particularly sophisticated, but still an indication of a deeply-organized threat. Then we have the clowns running into Wal-Mart, buying, say, 100 cell phones, thinking that it won't be noticed. Again, an indication of very unsophisticated people, but still, people who want to kill us. On the eve of the fifth anniversary of 9/11, there's lots of "noise."

There's also the clear indication that the US aviation system is a sitting duck.

We've spent what, $15 billion? $20 billion? on "security" and all we have to show for it is an enormous bureaucracy, and a growing industry of politicians and bureaucrats like Kean and Hamilton writing books on the subject.

But, in light of the latest threat - liquid explosives - our intrepid Department of Homeland Security has implemented the ultimate counter-measures: Ban anything wet on the airplane. No water bottles. No hairspray. No deodorants, No toothpaste. No lip gloss. No mascara.

It's a breakthrough on the war on terror: Counter 'em with bad hygiene.

The Sheep Are Buying It. And, we've already seen Angie Airhead, the 6PM News reporter, on the scene at the airport, interviewing passengers stuck in hour-long screening lines:
Angie: How do you feel about these new security measures?

Traveler, standing tall, strong, and looking with great determination into the camera: "If it promotes the war on terror, I'll gladly give up my tube of Pepsodent!"


The only thing it promotes, moron, is tooth decay.

Some folks, reading and hearing the news, would jump right in and agree with the soon-to-be toothless wonder in that security line: Yeah, but if they're gonna use liquid explosives, whaddya suggest we do?"

We'll start with this: The US airport system is a sieve. The ramp areas are about as secure as an unlocked Lexus in the South Bronx. Those guys working on the taxiway? The people cleaning the airplanes? The people slopping the special sauce in the burger joints in the sterile area? The catering truck, and the people driving it? We covered it weeks ago - it's a fact, regardless of the blatant lies coming out of the TSA.

The point is that if really sophisticated terrorists want to get stuff onto the ramp at big airports, they probably can. So taking a bottle of make-up foundation away from mamma isn't going to do diddly to counter terrorism.

Next, these are suicide terrorists, remember. They aren't too concerned with where the explosives are, just as long as they go boom at the right time. So, they can put this stuff into their checked suitcases, conveniently cloaked and disguised as a bottle of cough syrup. True, when in the mixed and ready state, most of the typical street-variety explosive liquid substances can be unstable. But that covers the less sophisticated, learned-it-off-the-web variety of terrorist. A more erudite virgin-seeker may use more stable varieties of explosives. And, they can be set off remotely while the terrorist is comfortably seated in first class.

So Here We React, Again. The negligent people running the TSA have ignored the threat of liquid explosive detection for years. Right after 9/11, technologies were discussed that could ascertain if that bottle in the Samsonite was mouthwash, nitro, or a bottle of cheap hooch. But the TSA ignored them, because the TSA is a political bureaucracy run by incompetents who have had no anticipatory plan to counter anything.

Prime Example: Richard Reid sticks explosives in his shoe. The TSA reacts by requiring shoes to be put through a metal detector. A metal detector that can't detect explosives.

So, now we're all going to be sitting on airplanes, with no chapstick, no make-up, no lip gloss, and no mascara. Unless the terrorist is a part-time hooker, this won't do anything except make the coach cabin even less attractive.

Cell Phones & Laptops Next. The TSA's idea of security is "target removal" - not counter-measures to protect our way of life. The idea is that if something can conceivably be used as a terrorist device, or if something might be a target, the philosophy is to simply remove it. It's like circling the wagons tighter and tighter to make a smaller target. Not defending territory, but ceding it to terrorism.

Remember, too, that Kip Hawley, Michael Chertoff and the rest of these security cub scouts have no plan, no goals, no ideas about what to do next. So jumping into that intellectual vacuum we have the congressional likes of Reps Markey, Wyden, and Israel, et al., all of whom have their own crackpot, short-term, and generally inept ideas of how security should look.

Almost certainly, the next thrust will be to ban all carry-on. And that will zap the airline industry. Forget the gooey patriotic pap about how "Americans will do what they must to adjust to new security measures.." That's a load of yogurt. First, what we see today are not security measures. They are the actions of government officials who are totally clueless and essentially are having their strings pulled by events.

Secondly, a laptop is now a necessary business tool. They are devices that cannot handle the stress of normal baggage handling. Plus, there is a theft problem at the TSA that has popped up at a number of airports across the country. Finally, if a passenger has to wait in the baggage claim area for 30 minutes to get his or her cell phone back, that isn't going to fly, literally.

Banning all carry-on, particularly laptops and cell phones, will fundamentally alter the value and the utility of air travel for a significant portion of the flying public. Don't buy into the stuff about, "... well, we didn't have 'em thirty years ago..." That's precisely right. This isn't thirty years ago.

Run, People, Run. Instead of making us safer by crafting anticipative counter-measures to terrorism, and instead of developing programs that protect and defend our way of life, Chertoff, Hawley, and - deal with it - the entire Bush Administration have no plan except to have us run faster and faster away whenever there's a threat.

Another terrorist attack - on a plane, at an airport, in a subway, on a pipeline, wherever - is, unfortunately inevitable. The lack of planning and the lack of expertise in place that DHS and TSA nearly guarantee it.

We know the problem. We know the real threat. It's us.

[chandlers dad]

Funnily enough, this is already what seems to be in place when passing through security at Italian nightstops. The single policeman sitting at the scanner, who then waves us through (some of the time, at least) without checking us closely when we set the metal detector arch off, appears to check our names off against a list on a piece of paper he has.

Presumably these are local procedures insisted upon by the Italian authorities, but they seem to work and allow a more er 'pragmatic' approach to crew search procedures.

I would advocate such measures be put in place for all flights where the crew have a need to pass through security. This could easily then be extended to include crew on positioning flights too.

It can't be that difficult to implement as they seem able to cope in Italy and, of course, have to supply the names of every passenger too on flights to the USA. Again - no problem when the alternative would be to cancel the flights and just shut up shop.

If only they cared about their crews as much as their profits. :mad:


Send a list of approved crewmembers, or hand carry it down to each security checkpoint. If someone is not on the list, then they can either call ops and get a revised copy sent down or go through the entire security process.

Seems simple and would speed things up. Thats why the idiots will never do it.

[BOAC]

CD - I proposed this at Post #378 (doesn't time fly when you are having fun:ugh: ) and spoke to my IPA man who said the system had been 'in place' 'for ages' but.............well..........no-one seems to do it in the UK.

[chandlers dad]

CD - I proposed this at Post #378 (doesn't time fly when you are having fun:ugh: ) and spoke to my IPA man who said the system had been 'in place' 'for ages' but.............well..........no-one seems to do it in the UK.

Sure not doing it in the states either, so might be worth an email to the IPA guy again. Something needs to change and hope we figure something out and soon.

[BOAC]

I'll try - maybe the BALPA guys can try there too? I have severe doubts whether the lunatics causing this chaos for crews will accept any sensible inputs, though.

[chandlers dad]

I'll try - maybe the BALPA guys can try there too? I have severe doubts whether the lunatics causing this chaos for crews will accept any sensible inputs, though.

Make it easy for them to understand. Stop paying your dues then they will wake up that they need to represent the pilots that they are charging each and every month for REPRESENTATION. I have a dim sense of unions anyway (they are a needed evil... at times) but them living on our money every month while doing nothing until being forced to do so is not my idea of a good cause.

Wish you luck, you have a lot of us standing behind you and this idea.