Airport Security (Merged) - Effects on Crew/Staff

[G-CPTN]

As of 03.30 BST, NO cabin baggage (other than flight documents) is permitted on-board aircraft leaving from Gatwick (and possibly other UK airports).

Said to be as a result of a threat of possible terrorist action against aircraft 'in flight'. All UK airports affected.

A 'substantial' numbers of arrests made around London.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778575.stm
A major terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight has been disrupted by police, Scotland Yard says.
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled on board aircraft in hand luggage.
During the night, police arrested a number of people in London after a counter-terrorist operation they said had lasted several months.
Police believe the attacks would have been particularly targeted at flights from the UK to the US.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1230417,00.html?f=dta
Police say they believe they have foiled a plot to smuggle explosive devices in airline hand luggage to blow up planes in mid-flight.
The targets are said to have been flights between the Britain and the US.
Overnight police have arrested a number of people in London.
The Met says the arrests are the culmination of a major covert counter-terrorist operation lasting several months.
It follows a pre-planned intelligence led operation by the Met's anti-terrorist branch and security service.
Police say they believed the aim was to detonate explosive devices smuggled on board the aircraft in hand luggage.
It is believed that the attacks would have been particularly targeted at flights from the UK to the USA.
"We would like to reassure the public that this operation was carried out with public safety uppermost in our minds," said a police statement.
"This is a major operation which inevitably will be lengthy and complex. We will provide further information as soon as possible."

[luoto]

BBC Radio 4 claims that all hand baggage is not being allowed in the hold at LGW and (with implicaiton) other UK airports as part of a clampdown announced by the CAA a few hours ago. Nothing yet on the news sites I have looked at.

[Airbubba]

'Plot to blow up planes' foiled

A major terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight has been disrupted, Scotland Yard says.
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled on aircraft in hand luggage, with flights from the UK to the US being targeted.

During the night, police arrested a number of people in London after a counter-terrorist operation they said had lasted several months.

Security at all airports in the UK has been tightened and delays are expected.

The Department for Transport said security at all UK airports has been increased.

Passengers on all flights will not be allowed to take any hand luggage on to any flights in the UK.

Only the barest essentials - including passports and wallets - will be allowed to be carried on board in transparent plastic bags.

"We hope that these measures, which are being kept under review by the government, will need to be in place for a limited period only," the statement said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778575.stm

______________________________________

These guys may be up to something in the U.S. as well:

2 Held on Terror Charges in Ohio

The Associated Press
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; 10:44 PM

MARIETTA, Ohio -- Two men were charged Wednesday with money laundering in support of terrorism after authorities said they found airplane passenger lists and information on airport security checkpoints in their car.

Deputies stopped Osama Sabhi Abulhassan, 20, and Ali Houssaiky, 20, both of Dearborn, Mich., on a traffic violation Tuesday. They found the flight documents along with $11,000 cash and 12 phones in the car, said Washington County Sheriff Larry Mincks.

Prosecutor Susan Vessels declined to say how the phones, cash or flight information involved terrorism.

Abulhassan and Houssaiky admitted buying about 600 phones in recent months at stores in southeast Ohio, said sheriff's Maj. John Winstanley. The men said they sold the phones to someone in Dearborn, a Detroit suburb.

Investigators going through the car after the pair were pulled over in Marietta, about 90 miles southeast of Columbus, also found a map that showed locations of Wal-Mart stores from Ohio through Kentucky, Tennessee and into North and South Carolina, Vessels said.

FBI spokesman Mike Brooks in Cincinnati said his office was notified about the arrests and an agent was investigating.

A message seeking comment was left Wednesday evening with Ray Smith, a public defender who represents Abulhassan. Houssaiky did not yet have an attorney, Vessels said.

Abulhassan and Houssaiky did not speak at a hearing Wednesday in Marietta Municipal Court in which a judge set their bond at $200,000, Vessels said. Another bond hearing was set for Thursday.

The charges allege the two laundered between $5,000 and $25,000, Vessels said. A conviction carries a maximum 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/09/AR2006080902073.html

[LTNman]

From Luton airport's website:

Members of the public not travelling today will not be allowed within the terminal building.

[Jordan D]

British Airways Security Advice (https://lfn.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/lfn.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=2350&p_created=1155185706&p_sid=wcmr9Iei&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0 3JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1 hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1) including a full list of what can and cannot be taken on board.

Jordan

[G-CPTN]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778615.stm
The Department for Transport has issued advice to air passengers after a suspected plot to blow up planes was prevented:
Following this morning's police action, security at all UK airports has been increased and additional security measures have been put in place for all flights.
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 must be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.
Passengers may 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-size 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 the 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 must be hand searched, and their footwear and all the items they are carrying must be X-ray screened.
Pushchairs and walking aids must be X-ray screened, and only airport-provided wheelchairs may pass through the screening point.
In addition to the above, all passengers boarding flights to the USA and all the items they are carrying, including those acquired after the central screening point, must be subjected to secondary search at the boarding gate.
Any liquids discovered must be removed from the passenger.
There are no changes to current hold baggage security measures.
Regrettably, significant delays at airports are inevitable. Passengers are being asked to allow themselves plenty of extra time and to ensure that other than the few permitted items listed above, all their belongings are placed in their hold baggage and checked in.
These additional security measures will make travel more difficult for passengers, particularly at such a busy time of the year. But they are necessary and will continue to keep flights from UK airports properly secure.
We hope that these measures, which are being kept under review by the government, will need to be in place for a limited period only.
In light of the threat to aviation and the need to respond to it, we are asking the travelling public to be patient and understanding and to cooperate fully with airport security staff and the police.
If passengers have any questions on their travel arrangements or security in place at airports they should contact their airline or carrier.

[Jordan D]

Report: BBC Radio News (0700 Bulletin).

Heathrow Airport suspended check-in to allow for passengers to clear the landside terminal area. Excess passenger build up on landside is posing a H&S threat, so they want to clear some to airside, before continuing checking. Extra staff are being brought in.

ENDS

Jordan

[warkman]

DfT web site information

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/page/dft_about_612280.hcsp

No liquids of any form to be allowed into the cabin from pax. points to a liquid explosive being the way in which they intended to blow up 20 planes (amount of planes not proved, only comments on news)

[G-CPTN]

So is the THREAT as effective as the terrorism ACT?

[Final 3 Greens]

Anyone know how this is affecting transfer pax, who are in the system with hand baggage from elsewhere?

If this continues for long, it will do the UK air transport sector no favours.

I need to book some flights this monring, was intending to use LHR as the transfer point, but no way now.

I'll route through AMS, PAR or FRA and so will thousands of others when the word gets around.

[G-CPTN]

Latest BBC News 24 suggest that the terrorists were 'surprised' by intervention. The 'event' wasn't planned for today, but intelligence suggested that they were close to being ready, so the security services have swooped and arrested at least some of them.
The implication of this is that this level of security will extend beyond today . . .


(What a load of crap the presenters are talking 'between the facts'.)
David Learmount pontificating (about capability of airports to cope, rather than technical security matters).

[Curious Pax]

Bizarre David Learmount quote on the BBC website: "This is the first time this measure has actually been taken. Certainly I've never seen hand luggage banned." - unless my memory is very faulty didn't this happen in the aftermath of 9/11 in the UK? I would have thought he would remember that.
These days I find it hard not to be drawn to the Hermann Goering quote in a JB thread: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2766939&postcount=174 - despite having no plausible reason not to think that this fuss is entirely justified.

[tezzer]

And the news programmes, BBC particularily are talking it up as if it's the end of the World as we know it. All I hear is speculation and supposition !

[Rhiannon]

US cable news channels are carrying the UK news programs live. Same breathless delivery as everywhere.

[IB4138]

It would be of assistance, if the locos especially, let the traveller know what their policy is on hold baggage weight and in some case items checked in to the hold, with regard to charges, in view of these restrictions.

Unfortunately there will be some who will be rubbing their hands and seeing extra profit.

[stevef]

Whilst I understand the reasons behind this, why would it not be possible to carry on board items purchased airside AFTER being security-checked? A five-hour flight without any reading material or non-airline bottled refreshment will be quite dire.
I imagine that Duty-free shops will be closed for a while.

[G-CPTN]

I've asked this question on another thread: Who is going to be responsible for damage or, more importantly, theft from checked bags. Many women carry their jewellery in hand baggage, as advised by the airlines.
They'll just have to WEAR it (or will worn jewellery be banned)?

[sandy hills]

Wonder how this is affecting operating crew? How many of us carry heaven knows what in our flight bags. Will our laptops etc. be banished to the hold too.

[G-CPTN]

I think the media are doing their usual job of making everything seem 10 times worse than it actually is.
Together with the Government/Security Services. They have apparently 'surprised' the suspects in advance of any scheduled event, so the probability of any incident occuring TODAY is zero (IMHO). However, I wouldn't deny that a raised security level could dissuade terrorists from acting (they'll turn around and go home), but the 'response' is as crippling as would an event have been.

[Final 3 Greens]

G-CPTN

but the 'response' is as crippling as would an event have been

You are correct, the question now is how long it takes to return to normality.

[Llademos]

G-CPTN
but the 'response' is as crippling as would an event have been
You are correct, the question now is how long it takes to return to normality.

How can banning hand baggage be as crippling as aircraft blowing up in mid air? Yes, there will be significant disruption for a while, but, as always, the aviation industry will work through it, sort out what needs to be done, and make it happen.

Ll

[Ray Darr]

This was just issued - at 0615z today... LHR Short-haul flights of 3 hours or less are prohibited UFN. A review will be taking place within 2 hours. What a mess...

Pity to the innocent travellers, the economy, and all crew and staff involved, but safety first.

Cheers,
R.D.

[luoto]

Seems flts from Brussels to LON now canx, according to Reuters. AP reports U.S. restrictions on liquid based products now.

[SXB]

The majority of passengers would have turned up at the airport unaware of these restrictions, as the day goes by, and from tomorrow, those passengers arriving should be aware of these temporary rules and should prepare accordingly.

BA are offering to rebook passengers, without penalty, who don't want to travel today or tomorrow onto flights over the next few weeks regardless of whether their ticket is changeable. I haven't heard if any of the lo-cos are doing this, though their customer service engine isn't really designed to deal with several thousand passengers over a short space of time.

Best of luck to anyone travelling or working through a UK airport today.

[luoto]

All flights incoming cancelled according to Eurocontrol.

http://www.cfmu.eurocontrol.be/chmi...im&aim=00084168

HIGH LEVEL SECURITY IN UK AIRPORTS
Valid from 10 Aug 2006 to 10 Aug 2006 (released 10 Aug 2006 at 06:50:41UTC)

HIGH LEVEL SECURITY IN UK AIRPORTS
----------------------------------
. UPDATE 3
DUE TO THE ONGOING SECURITY ISSUES EGLL (Heathrow) AIRPORT IS CLOSED TO ALL
ARRIVING TFC WIE TILL 1200UTC
.
OPERATORS MUST SYSTEMATICALLY CANCEL ALL PLN, RPL OR FPL FOR
THE FLIGHTS THEY DO NOT INTEND TO OPERATE
.
CFMU OPSD ON BEHALF OF LONDON FMP

[Jordan D]

Without wanting to see this thread become anything more than an information poing, can we keep the arguments over security elsewhere? Maybe Jet Blast.

BBC News reports: Lufthansa cancels all flights to LHR, Brussels to LHR/LGW flights all cancelled. News conference from BAA in next 30 minutes.

Regarding comment above detailing Lo-Co: Easyjet (according to website) are allowing penalty free changes.

Also for info: BA/Easyjet/Ryanair share prices down

Jordan

[Jinkster]

HOME SECRETARY STATEMENT ON INCREASED AIRPORT SECURITY (10/08/06)


The British Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, made the following statement concerning the major counter-terrorist operation conducted in the UK on 10 August: Overnight the police, with the full knowledge of Ministers, have carried out a major counter-terrorism operation to disrupt what we believe to be a major threat to the UK and international partners.

The police, acting with the Security Service, MI5, are investigating an alleged plot to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life. The police believe the alleged plot was a very significant one indeed.

At 2am this morning the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre raised the UK threat state to its highest level - "CRITICAL".

This is now being publicly announced as I promised to Parliament last month.

This is a precautionary measure. We are doing everything possible to disrupt any further terrorist activity. This will mean major disruption at all UK airports from today. But as far as is possible we want people to go about their business as normal.

The police will provide an update on the operation later this morning and Ministers will keep the public regularly informed.



Full post at http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029391629&a=KArticle&aid=1153395950689

[Trinity 09L]

BBC reporting LHR not accepting any more inbound aircraft, except those in flight - LHR full on the ground?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

08:48 local.. Several European Airlines and Airports not sending any flights to Heathrow.

Sad state of affairs..

[tomharrison]

Sounds like it must be full there. News 24 are reporting that due to the delays of getting aircraft off stand due to the increased security, no stands are available for inbounds.

[Jordan D]

Update on BBC News: Olympic, AF and LH all flights to UK cancelled.

Jordan

[warkman]

Sources now reporting that the terrorists were all British born Muslims and that they were booked on consecutive American owned airlines from LGW, LHR, MAN BHX and GLA

[lexxity]

The live pictures of LHR the bbc were showing a little while ago showed it looking pretty much full. The check in areas look even more chaotic than usual so one assumes that they are not getting many flights away on time which is why stands are full.

[docash1983]

LHR has just been closed!

[dtur2424]

Can anyone confirm this?If so, how long for do you think?

[Wycombe]

BAA's website seem to have crashed, or be inaccessible due to demand :uhoh:

[simoncooldude]

Can anyone confirm this?If so, how long for do you think?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778771.stm

and scroll down to Heathrow. All flights not currently in the air will not be permitted to land at LHR

[luoto]

Newsroom contact mentioned UNVERIFIED information that UK military scrambled about an hour ago to go and check "something" out west of Ireland.

Precuationary, I would say, but I am not as au fait with the UK military procedures.

[G-CPTN]

All UK airports now seem to be clogged with 'media' desperate for information and interviews.

[Danny]

I have just flown into LHR before the total shut down. Eeerie. Luckily got my bags but have no idea how I'm going to get up to MAN. Hitch hiking sounds like a plausible possibility.

Chaos reigns. However, please limit this thread to issues directly affecting aircrew. This is not the place to discuss what pax have to put up with. I have moved all the posts that are off topic as far as I'm converned to the Jet Blast forum where you can digress as much as you like.

This forum is for aircrew and issues that affect them. If you feel the urge to do spotterish things or discuss pax woes, use the appropriate forum as otherwise, it is a shame to have your work removed.

[1985]

EGLL has a zero flow rate inbound TFN this is due to lack of stands etc. Inbounds with a greater than 3hr flying time are being allowed to land and have been catered for. EGCC, EGKK and EGSS have reduced rates and all airports have MDI's.

[luoto]

LHR close put back further:

Latest EGLL notam:

A2024/06 - HEATHROW AIRPORT IS CLOSED TO ALL SHORTHAUL FLIGHTS WITH SECTORS OF 3 HOURS OR LESS. A REVIEW WILL BE UNDERTAKEN AT 1400Z. 10 AUG 07:42 UNTIL 10 AUG 14:00

[Jordan D]

Update on post #31 from me: BBC News now reports that AF have cancelled only Paris-LHR flights whilst the backlog clears, and that IB have cancelled all flights. Also reporting that Tel Aviv-London flights are cancelled (BBC Article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4778871.stm))

How this sits with the current NOTAM (which is also reported), I don't know.

Jordan

[cwatters]

Heard reports of traffic delays leading to UK airports now. Stansted mentioned specifically. Allow more time if your flight is running

[747-436]

Latest is that it is closed to flights not in the air already until 1500z now!!
The scene at LHR with many planes on the ground is a bit like how it was last August, I don't need to remind people what happened then!!
Completely different now though!
Worrying situation, hope this won;t have too many long term effects on the industry.

[Jockflyer]

I fly regional t/prop out of Glasgow. I've just been told by ops, that we are not allowed flight cases. Only the bare minimum to be taken onto flight deck. No mobiles. So basically your plog, headset, and pens. Don't know about calculator.

This is terrible......where am I going to keep my sandwiches!!!!!

JF

[UNDERTHEROSUN1F]

LHR close put back further:

Latest EGLL notam:

A2024/06 - HEATHROW AIRPORT IS CLOSED TO ALL SHORTHAUL FLIGHTS WITH SECTORS OF 3 HOURS OR LESS. A REVIEW WILL BE UNDERTAKEN AT 1400Z. 10 AUG 07:42 UNTIL 10 AUG 14:00

do you have a link for the NOTAMS,i couldn't find anything on the AIP ..

[G-CPTN]

BA are offering to rebook passengers, without penalty, who don't want to travel today or tomorrow onto flights over the next few weeks regardless of whether their ticket is changeable. I haven't heard if any of the lo-cos are doing this, though their customer service engine isn't really designed to deal with several thousand passengers over a short space of time.
Ryanair have stated that they have no 'immediate' spare capacity, and those unable to fly today will be looking towards NEXT WEEK for seats.

[RoyHudd]

What are the "authorities" instructing Flight Deck and Cabin Crew as acceptable to bring to work? I have heard nothing, except my company advises to bring only what is necessary for the job.

Like Jockflyer, that means my butties. Crew food is highly dodgy, always has been!

[beamer]

The one thing the CAPTAIN needs today is a mobile phone so that he can maintain contact with Ops at all times and actually try and salvage the day for passengers, crew and airline alike.

[martinidoc]

Mobiles were being allowed through at EGNT earlier, not sure whether they have now stopped this.

[Joe le Taxi]

Quite so - Refusal to allow flight crew to carry on bags will not work; My bag contains things I actually need, including a phone and a laptop. There has to be a distinction between the crew and passengers at security checks, and if they cant take it from our ID passes that we are the pilots that we say we are, then they shouldn't be letting us through at all.

Kudos to the UK security services for preventing murderers from taking many lives, and from severely damaging the airline industry.

[Boing7117]

The news is reporting that possessions brought by passengers are being transferred into the hold.

Apart from the fact that this prevents hand luggage from being in the cabin - is there a real safety reason why everything should go in the 'belly' of the plane?

i.e. should a device be smuggled into the hold that could be detonated - is there more chance of the crew being able to land an aircraft rather than it occurring in the cabin? (i.e. is the hold designed to withstand an explosion to a greater degree than where the pax sit?)

[luoto]

Underthesun:

ais.org.uk is a disjointed p.i.t.a so I went West:)

https://www.notams.jcs.mil/

slap in egll and it is currently no 3.

[DirectAnywhere]

Personally, what is most interesting in all this is the ban on all liquids. This includes prescribed medicines that are unable to be verified to be medicines.

They are specifically identified in the list of prohibited substances on the BA website.

It appears to this casual observer that these potential terrorists have access to some form of explosive in liquid form - presumably in multiple component parts hence the hold carriage requirement - that can be used to bring down an aircraft.

It will be interesting to see if this is indeed the case and what the outcome with respect to future security measures turns out to be.

[Arkroyal]

Our co emailed the regs of which the following extract refers to crews:

Airline Crew

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

5. Crew accessing the Restricted Zone through staff search areas must carry only those 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.

6. However, no liquids of any type are permitted other than those mentioned above as able to be taken into the Restricted Zone by passengers.
[for those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger)]

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

Temporary Passes

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

Company Mobile Phone
It has been agreed with the Security authorities that the Captain ONLY may retain his issued company phone as it forms part of the normal operation


So it seems, jockflier will have no sandwiches to worry about, so no bag required.

I am very concernes, as a loco pilot, how I am going to feed myself at all. Can't take anything on board, so does that mean I'm living on one of two varieties of sandwich, and cheapo orange juice for the forseeable future. That is unaceptable.

edit to avoid controversy and offending wilting violets

[egbt]

Apart from the fact that this prevents hand luggage from being in the cabin - is there a real safety reason why everything should go in the 'belly' of the plane?


News reports are that the devices were to be assembled on board, hence the move of the components to the hold.

[Jockflyer]

Arkroyal, not sure your last comment is particularily sensible.:=

[Arkroyal]

Jock, it might not be polite, but it is eminently sensible

[wallsend]

Just been speaking with friends who work at an airport in the North East of England.
The response at the non-terminal security gate (i.e. the workers' entrance) has been interesting. A fireman was told he couldn't bring his electronic car key in and would have to leave it IN his car and leave the car unlocked in the car park. Mobile phones are similarly banned - although a member of the oncoming HEMS crew managed to persuade the security person that the work-issued phone was essential on the scene of an accident.
The cleared working people at the said airport regularly get the full nine yards at the security gate while there are regular incursions from the seemingly unguarded south fence of the perimeter, so no real surprises here.

[spekesoftly]

Just been speaking with friends who work at an airport in the North East of England.
The response at the non-terminal security gate (i.e. the workers' entrance) has been interesting. A fireman was told he couldn't bring his electronic car key in and would have to leave it IN his car and leave the car unlocked in the car park.
I question the wisdom of broadcasting the suggestion that Airport Staff Car Parks may now be full of unlocked cars - keys at the ready!! :rolleyes:

The present security situation is the major issue, but let's not make careless comments that could only add to the misery.

[AeroMANC]

Just heard the US have closed their airspace to flights from the UK?

[wallsend]

I question the wisdom of broadcasting the suggestion that Airport Staff Car Parks may now be full of unlocked cars - keys at the ready!! :rolleyes:
The present security situation is the major issue, but let's not make careless comments that could only add to the misery.
What I failed to mention was that the said fireman was allowed to lock his car and keep his keys!
The implied point behind my post was that once again "the workers" who have all been exhaustively security checked suffer unnecessarliy under some security regimes.

[Genghis the Engineer]

What I failed to mention was that the said fireman was allowed to lock his car and keep his keys!
The implied point behind my post was that once again "the workers" who have all been exhaustively security checked suffer unnecessarliy under some security regimes.

Presumably the logic is that it avoids the risk of somebody impersonating a member of crew in order to get something nasty airside.

I have a friend and colleague who is a naturalised Brit, but born (and looks) Palestinian. He however has been here for years, and by virtue of probably knowing more about how jet engines work than virtually anybody else, has a UK Top-Secret clearance. There was a well known incident when he was transitting with a briefcase of classified documents, and ended up in a standoff with a policeman who wouldn't let him pass, because he wouldn't let said policeman see anything but the outside covers of the documents.

Sadly, we live in a nasty complicated world these days.

G

[ExSimGuy]

Flash8,

I have mentioned before that I get "profiled" (especially when American airlines are involved),despite being a "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant", due to;

Passport only 2 years old and already almost full of Mid-East stamps
Beard and dark skin (living in a sunny land and working outside a lot)I too take it philosophically, and I do agree that "profiling", of any kind, makes us all safer - even if it's a little inconvenient for me. The security peeps are always polite, so I am too, and it is just part of travelling in today's world - especially when I admit that I could be a "suspicious profile". I'll live with it.

(Danny, Mods - this is a serious aspect of today's events. Could I suggest that it is a "matter that effects the working lives (and prospects!) of aircrew as well as airlines" and, as such is possibly better in here than in the ratehr "less respectful" halls of JB. Naturally any rants about security might be better "moved out ;) )

[thefunky1]

I'm watching the BBC coverage at home and while I have to advise a very big pinch of salt, they are quoting associated press who in turn are quoting two "top American counter terrorism experts", stating that the airlines targetted are American , United and Continental.

I suspect this is mere speculation but will post link soon as.

[N380UA]

flash8

Your racial profiling would have failed with the shoe bomber .. Ried was his name? Although he sure didn’t look too intelligent was "White" and had a non-Arabic name.

[EGLD]

flash8
Your racial profiling would have failed with the shoe bomber .. Ried was his name? Although he sure didn’t look too intelligent was "White" and had a non-Arabic name.

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2001/12/26/image322435x.jpg

[easyprison]

I've just been reading through the talking point on the BBC website. Some of the comments there are just unreal. I think this takes 1st prize;

"So how am I supposed to take a 2 year old child on a 12 hour flight - with no activities and toys (not even a teddy bear because it isn't an essential medical requirement)?

Not being able to take passive items like coloring books is a total over-reaction.

BAA needs to make the investment in scanning technology that already exists. If they can scan checked baggage, they can scan hand luggage."

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Jordan D]

Update: BBC News reports British Airways to cancel all shorthaul & domestic flights in and out of LHR today (including Tripoli). Some shorthaul & domestic flights to and from LGW will also be cancelled.

Jordan

[lexxity]

For anyone who's stuck in London or Manchester and wanting to travel between the two, Virgin trains have siad they will accept any ticket for this journey on their trains services today.

Danny get you to Euston.

[smala01]

Interestingly there seems to be some precedent of terrorists converting seemingly innocent carry on items into bombs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlines_Flight_434

“US prosecutors said the device was a "Mark II" "microbomb" constructed using Casio digital watches as described in Phase I of Operation Bojinka of which this was a test. On Flight 434, Yousef used one tenth of the explosive power he planned to use on eleven U.S. airliners in January of 1995. The bomb was designed to slip through airport security checks undetected. The explosive used was liquid nitroglycerin, which was disguised as a bottle of contact lens fluid. The wires he used were hidden in the heel of his shoe. At that time, metal detectors used in airports did not go down far enough to detect anything there.”

[Daysleeper]

So how am I supposed to take a 2 year old child on a 12 hour flight - with no activities and toys (not even a teddy bear because it isn't an essential medical requirement)?

easyprison
I'm not sure what your saying but I wouldn't get on a one hour flight without a bunch of things to entertain my children let alone a 12 hour one. No toys no fly.

[20milesout]

a2027/06 - Heathrow Airport Is Closed To All Inbound Flights With Sectors Of 3 Hours Or Less Until 1400z. Flights From France, Holland, Belgium And Switzerland Are Excempt From This Restriction. 10 Aug 11:52 Until 10 Aug 15:00

[Jordan D]

Updated from post #72: BBC News Online reports here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4778931.stm) an updated international flight situation - including reference to LH, Olympic, Air New Zealand and others.

Jordan

[sugden]

I've just been reading through the talking point on the BBC website. Some of the comments there are just unreal. I think this takes 1st prize;
"So how am I supposed to take a 2 year old child on a 12 hour flight - with no activities and toys (not even a teddy bear because it isn't an essential medical requirement)?
Not being able to take passive items like coloring books is a total over-reaction.
BAA needs to make the investment in scanning technology that already exists. If they can scan checked baggage, they can scan hand luggage."
:mad: :mad: :mad:


Easyprison. People like the person quoted pay the wages of those of us in the airline business. We disregard their opinions at our peril.

I strongly believe that while today's actions require a careful review of security arrangements, today's actions are knee-jerk and unnecessary.

Firstly, those who might have set of bombs (an no-one is alledging that today was their target day) are in police cells. So for today at least the threat is, bizzarely, lower than it will perhaps be tomorrow (when they one they didn't catch tries to act).

If we keep the current arrangements air travel will be curtailed and people will lose their jobs, pilots, baggage handlers, the lot.

If we improve security (more powerful scanners, twice as many of them, rigorous limits on one item of carry on per person) we might remove this particlar threat without creating fear and chaos in it's wake. Because fear and chaos represent victory for terrorism.

[Jackonicko]

"So how am I supposed to take a 2 year old child on a 12 hour flight - with no activities and toys (not even a teddy bear because it isn't an essential medical requirement)?"

"I'm not sure what your saying but I wouldn't get on a one hour flight without a bunch of things to entertain my children let alone a 12 hour one. No toys no fly."

Not just for children. No book, no iPod, no fly for me, too, when flying for pleasure. I'd rather drive to my weekend break (already an attractive option for Paris and Brussels, allowing me to take more kit, bring back more wine, chocolate, etc. and giving me mobility when I'm there). This kind of 'precaution' is going to hit airlines (and by implication aircrew too) very hard.

And when flying for business I will usually have cameras and/or a laptop, and it's simply not on to expect me to subject these to the treatment that hold luggage gets. Airlines will have to provide some separate means by which fragile, high value items can be carried with confidence, or they will see a reduction in passenger numbers among those who pay (or whose companies' pay) premium fares.

[jimma]

I saw this on BBC news and I think it sums up how the media have been reporting:

"The old 'move on, there's nothing here to see' has been replaced with 'come here and look, this is what might happen to you'."

I would just like to add my support to the police and security services for stopping these people. Well done folks!!

[FlyingConsultant]

I completely understand the "no liquids" rule. I am actually surprised it wasn't like that before - liquid explosives have been around for a while. Buy your water after the security point, please. It's probably also good to be more safe than sorry today and in the next days - if they did not catch all of the bad guys, the one/two/three who are left over might just go ahead anyways.
I however question the wisdom of "no handluggage at all". Books, pencils, cell phones, newspaper, toys,:ugh: :ugh: what do they have to do with the actual threat/plot?
As for flightcrew, I am all for special treatment. These airports really need to get extra security points for all of you, with personal trained to know the difference between a flight manual and a bomb manual.
Lastly, let's see the good thing here: Police was able to interupt a major murder plot. Congratulations to them:D

[Rhiannon]

News from the major airport here on the US west coast interviewing pax who state they were not allowed to carry on any make up items including lipstick..... does this not seem a bit extreme?

[crjlover]

here the AIM issued by the CFMU:

HIGH LEVEL SECURITY IN UK AIRPORTS
----------------------------------
. UPDATE 5
--------
.
DUE TO THE ONGOING SECURITY ISSUES EGLL AIRPORT IS CLOSED TO ALL
ARRIVING TFC WIE TILL 1800
.
OPERATORS MUST SYSTEMATICALLY CANCEL ALL PLN, RPL OR FPL FOR
THE FLIGHTS THEY DO NOT INTEND TO OPERATE
.
CFMU OPSD ON BEHALF OF LONDON FMP


2 LH flight (1 fro FRA and 1 from HAM) diverted back to origin.

[matt_hooks]

I know flybe have waived all extra baggage costs, not sure on the other locos tho.

Just watching the BBC news 24 coverage, where on earth do they find these "experts" ???

I have a degree in aerospace engineering, and the stuff they are saying is SO far off the truth it's quite scary!

[ShesGreatintheGalley]

Easyprison. today's actions are knee-jerk and unnecessary.
Firstly, those who might have set of bombs (an no-one is alledging that today was their target day) are in police cells. So for today at least the threat is, bizzarely, lower than it will perhaps be tomorrow (when they one they didn't catch tries to act).
umm.. sorry but unless you happen to work for the department that is strictly investigating this issue how can you believe this?
if all you know about what is going on is from what you have heard on the news, read online and heard from friends/work - this does not make you an expert and making such statements as "this was unnecesary" and "those who might of set the bombs are in police cells" is ridiculous.
First of all.. do they know that they have caught everyone?
Second of all.. would you of like to of taken the risk that had they not of done what they did today, TWENTY aircraft would have been blown up (as is being reported here in australia)
gee, thats an awful lot of dead people to mourn, in return for a week or two or airport chaos.
Personally i would prefer this kind of chaos anyday than to have to go to work each day, get on my plane and believe that the government wont take things 'seriuously' until they have solid facts. In this day and age, it dosent work like that.

[LGS6753]

Mobile phones were used to detonate the Madrid train bombs (ten of them), and anything could be hidden in a soft toy (although likely to show on scanning monitors).

Evidently the reason for 'no hand luggage' is due to the stated threat emanating from liquids in soft drinks bottles. It's to make the public aware that almost anything can be seen as a threat.

I'm extremely glad the security services were on to this - today's chaos is so much more acceptable than a trawl through deep ocean waters for bodies and bits of aeroplane.

[Daysleeper]

TWENTY aircraft would have been blown up (as is being reported here in australia)

For pete sake lets get a bit of perspective here. So far all we have to go on is a load of press releases by a government and police force who havent exactly got the best reputation when it comes to getting these things right. For all we know this is based on rumour and heresay and despite all the high profile arrests there will turn out to have been nothing more than a conversation in a pub about why contact lens cleaning on aeroplanes really blows.

[aviate1138]

Personally i would prefer this kind of chaos anyday than to have to go to work each day, get on my plane and believe that the government wont take things 'seriuously' until they have solid facts. In this day and age, it dosent work like that.
Aviate 1138 agrees and observes.......
Someone is going to make loads'a'money out of clear sided, comfortably handled, carry on bags [to dimensions that do not upset Security types] over the next few months/years?
Aviate1138

[flown-it]

FlyingConsultant

You question the wisdom of banning cell phones. Well lets see, haven't cell phones been used already to set off explosives?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Unsubstantiated rumour at the moment (but from a reliable personal source), but it appears that the police have just found a bomb factory on Walton Road in High Wycombe. By my reckoning that's about 15 miles from LHR.

Of course it could be a perfectly innocent, everyday bomb factory, with no connection to all of this. Somehow however, I doubt it.

G

[brain fade]

Whilst not inclined to make light of todays 'situation'..........I think it likely that when the full facts emerge, they will show the present over reaction to be precisely that.

[Hold West]

Unsubstantiated rumour at the moment (but from a reliable personal source), but it appears that the police have just found a bomb factory on Walton Road in High Wycombe. By my reckoning that's about 15 miles from LHR.

Of course it could be a perfectly innocent, everyday bomb factory, with no connection to all of this. Somehow however, I doubt it.

G

Substantiated:

J3311/06 - TEMPORARY RESTRICTED AREA OWING TO THE INCIDENT AT HIGH WYCOMBE RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS (HIGH WYCOMBE) HAVE BEEN MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF THE AIR NAVIGATION ORDER 2005(A) IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE RAD 3NM CENTRED ON 513730N 0004442W. PILOTS ARE FORBIDDEN TO FLY WI THE DESIGNATED AIRSPACE WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THAMES VALLEY POLICE (EMERGENCY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) TEL 01865 846684 EXCEPT POLICE ACFT, HEMS ACFT, ACFT APPROACHING TO LAND AT OR DEPART FROM EGLL, EGGW, EGWU, OR EGTB(IF REMAINING S OF M40 MOTORWAY). ATC UNITS CLOSE TO THE INCIDENT AREA ARE REQUESTED TO ADVISE ACFT ON THEIR FREQ OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTAM. MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP 552 201.135.9 SFC 5000FT AMSL 10 AUG 14:01 UNTIL 16 AUG 09:00 ESTIMATED

[Capt.KAOS]

This reminds me of Operation Bojinka. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bojinka)

Now this is interesting:

"The two had already converted fourteen bottles of contact lens solution into bottles containing nitroglycerin, which was readily available in the Philippines. Yousef taped a metal rod to the arch of his of foot in place of the detonators. Yousef and Mohammed wore jewelry and clothing with metal to confuse airport security. They packed condoms in their bags to support their story that they were meeting women"

[atakacs]

Mobile phones were used to detonate the Madrid train bombs (ten of them)

Actually it was the alarm clock of the said mobile phones.

Just my 2c

[planetblu]

SECURITY is a serious issue but the way TVs and radios inform the public is scary. There are news reports talking about 20-30 airplanes involved in possible terrorist actions. Yes everithing is possible but.....
Too much noise. To properely work on these issues I do not think investigators need such a noise and such a big show. Maybe this is a need for politicians.....:confused:

[A330ismylittlebaby]

umm.. sorry but unless you happen to work for the department that is strictly investigating this issue how can you believe this?
if all you know about what is going on is from what you have heard on the news, read online and heard from friends/work - this does not make you an expert and making such statements as "this was unnecesary" and "those who might of set the bombs are in police cells" is ridiculous.
First of all.. do they know that they have caught everyone?
Second of all.. would you of like to of taken the risk that had they not of done what they did today, TWENTY aircraft would have been blown up (as is being reported here in australia)
gee, thats an awful lot of dead people to mourn, in return for a week or two or airport chaos.
Personally i would prefer this kind of chaos anyday than to have to go to work each day, get on my plane and believe that the government wont take things 'seriuously' until they have solid facts. In this day and age, it dosent work like that.

I hope they keep the high security levels for good and not just for 2 weeks.

Everything can be bought in the duty free shops etc. Maybe for the children we should install PTV's on all aircraft over 2 hours of flight.

I pesonally think we should get rid of visa waiver programs and have visa's instead as each individual would be screened and the visa's probably last longer. And to be background checked by the TSA when going into the USA

[Panman]

I am sure the BAA (hearing cash registers ringing) are negotiating with the government over just that.

[PaperTiger]

I completely understand the "no liquids" rule. I am actually surprised it wasn't like that before - liquid explosives have been around for a while. Buy your water after the security point, please.That would be sensible, except that that 'secure' water is also banned.
At KSEA this morning the airside stores had pulled all beverages off the shelves. Nobody (yet) seems to have thought about the vending machines though :hmm:

[er340790]

Hopefully the security forces have got their facts right this time re the 'bomb factory'. (Lest we forget that these are the same forces that put eight bullets through the head of an innocent Brazilian and blew away a man for carrying a table leg along a London street.) If so, excellent work. If not someone has a hell of a lot of explaining to do.

It will be interesting to any effect on flying UK-US with the US majors. Several co-workers have been flying LHR-JFK with AC via YYZ since 2005 to avoid the US/UK majors.

[TheKentishFledgling]

Ref: A2031/06
FIR: EGTT
Code: FAXX
Traffic: VFR IFR
Purpose: Immed. atten. aircraft operators PIB entry Operationally significant for flights
Scope: Aerodrome
Lower limit (FL): 000
Upper limit (FL): 999
Centre and radius (nm): 5129N00028W005
Parent ICAO: EGLL
Start date/time: 10/08/2006 14:55 UTC
End date/time: 10/08/2006 23:59 UTC
Activity period: null
Lower height limit: 000
Upper height limit: 999

RESTRICTIONS REGARDING SHORT HAUL FLIGHTS TO LONDON HEATHROW HAVE BEEN LIFTED. A TACTICAL CAPACITY RESTRICTION MAY BE APPLIED BY CFMU.

[exvicar]

& umpteen million have flown direct with UK/US carriers! My guess is they will continue to do so. Exvicar, off to the US with a UK carrier this evening (hopefully)!

[sugden]

Hello again.

A few people disagreeing heartily with my view that this is an absurd over-reaction. Fair enough. Let me ask this question.

Was any airport security breached today? Or yesterday? Or the day before that?

If there have been security breaches then I can understand the lock-down mentality.

But there haven't been.

So why the lock-down?

Do we suddenly think that, just because we find someone who was going to try something bad, all the security we have in place to prevent them achieving their aim is obsolete? Really? In that case, fire John Reid and Alastair Darling for presiding over such indequate processes.

There has been no security breach. There is not, therefore, as far as anyone has said, any reason to go into lock-down melt-down mode.

Ill-judged panic-fuelled over-reaction, in my opinion.

Anyone whom applauds this on a long term basis had better get ready to find another job. The public will stay at home.

[carbonfibre]

At a guess they have locked down so not to give forewarning to potential terrorists and catch them if they got through the net, only a guess though:ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

Putting myself in the mind of these terrorists for a moment (not a pleasant thing to do), let's say that I was determined to cause as much death or damage as possible. I know that the police / MI5, etc. don't want me to do this, and there is always a risk of some of my merry band being picked up.

Let's say this happened, and I didn't happen to get picked up. It's a reasonable bet that sooner or later, through interrogation techniques, sloppy record keeping, tracing phone calls, I'll be tracked down too. So, I have two choices:

(1) Run for the hills and hope nobody follows me, or
(2) Try to resurrect something from the failed plan, and maybe get some result - one or two airliners down instead of 10, for example; or at-least gain martyrdom trying.

In that position, I'd probably go for (2); and in case of this I might well have a backup supply of "here's one we prepared earlier" explosives tucked away.



Whether I'm right or not in this supposition is irrelevant, the point is that I might be right. IMHO, that's the justification for the clampdown and, deeply inconvenient and inevitably OTT as it is, I can't see that the authorities have any choice in the matter but to act as they have.

G

[Ejector]

JOCKFLYER ~ Flight crew restrictions
I fly regional t/prop out of Glasgow. I've just been told by ops, that we are not allowed flight cases. Only the bare minimum to be taken onto flight deck. No mobiles. So basically your plog, headset, and pens. Don't know about calculator.

This is terrible......where am I going to keep my sandwiches!!!!!

JF

I presume you told them that the flight would be grounded then.

Don't be silly not having your nav bag, unless you are doing a VFR senic.

I spose if I worked for you pathetic company I may have lost my job today, wouldn't be a bad thing though. :ok:

[Staller]

Just arrived home from Heathrow, at 2:45 a Virgin A340-600 and Singapore Airlines 74-4 were parked on the taxiway obviously no stands available so its pretty hectic! Wouldnt advise anyone to go to LHR unless you really cant avoid it!

[Wizofoz]

This is terrible......where am I going to keep my sandwiches!!!!!


Seriously though, what have Ryanair pilots done as they don't get crew food
and aren't allowed to buy water from the bar?

Whilst on the subject, has FR been charging passengers £10 to put baggage in the hold whan they're not allowed to take on hand baggage?

[Jordan D]

Wizofoz - please see further up the thread: FlyBe & Ryanair have suspended luggage charges under the current situation.

Jordan

[BMI701EGCC]

Why was "Olympic" airlines mentioned today?virgin radio said that they've cancelled of of their UK flights....

I thought they went into admin months ago?


i feel there is something fishy about the whole thing, like the above poster said, the police agencies have FOILED it, meaning nothing has happened, so the lockdown?

can someone explain!

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

It's been mentioned before on the thread - there may be a risk that other terrorists could be travelling right now......

[BMI701EGCC]

nah, its just MI-5 working its majic once again!

if u watched itv this morning every Q was "so if this did happen, what would the debris field be like?", i mean what the f**k is the point in asking Q's like this?????NOTHING HAPPENED!!

Also, straight away they said blair and bush are meeting shorty to discuss what to do next, are you guys sure we'r not watching a soap, cas it seems perfectly planned out!!

[luoto]

ONE niavely trusts that if the ban on taking water, food etc airside stays, then those selling such items airside will be forbidden from "profiteering".

[gpn01]

Putting myself in the mind of these terrorists for a moment (not a pleasant thing to do), let's say that I was determined to cause as much death or damage as possible. G

It's the threat of terror that works for terrorism. What has been achieved today has been damaging to Public confidence in air travel as a safe form of transport. Massive flight delays, feeling of uncertainty, worry about the prospect of bombs, renewed fear about air travel, etc. This could have a long term impact on air travel business. So, the psychology is almost as effective, without any loss of life. That's where the Government and the Security Services are caught between a rock and a hard place - don't react and people could die, react and there may be lives saved. Tough call. For the terrorists, they've achieved their objective already of causing dissruption, so no need need to take further risks. This does assume an element of cool, calm, rational, logic though :-(

[derekl]

Each time the terrorists try a tactic, the specific tactic is blocked by security procedures post hoc. So the terrorists try a new tactic. We then block that.

We had hijackers with pistols, we introduced metal detectors. Then there were hold luggage bombs, so we started screening hold luggage one way and another. Then the hijackers used little knives, so we confiscated nail-clippers. Next we had the shoe-bomber, so now we all have to have our shoes inspected.

And the latest is liquid explosive in bottles, so we ban bottles of water.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm dreading the eventuality of the underwear bomber.

If we ground all commercial flights, they'll attack trains, buses, shopping centres, sports stadia, motorway junctions, churches, synagogues, random crowds of people with truck bombs. And several of these have been committed.

I regret that intelligence-led profiling is now absolutely necessary.

[Call Established]

At BHX no personal mobile phones allowed for any staff going airside. Flight crew taking only essential items to the acft in clear plastic bags which are being handed out. All staff having a body search regardless, shoes off and scanned etc...... Only allowing a company or aircraft phone, seems a bit bizarre! LGW have no issue's with mobiles at the mo I understand!

[Deal or No deal]

For staff, that I know of - Bags, Mobiles ( unless company issue to captain ), car keys, food, liquids, cigarettes ( later on in the day ), lighters / matches..... chewing gum?? laptops, radio / mp3 / any electrical device really!!

Been told that solid food can be taken tomorrow!!

So why not watches?? Wasn't one used before?? With a liquid device??Was mentioned earlier, 1995 I think, as a timer??

So we are safe today, due to the extra measures.... Does this mean that we're not safe the rest of the time?? Are these restrictions to become 'the norm'??

One wonders........

[320 driver]

I cant believe some people think that the effect of the clampdown is as bad as the effect of the event.

Jolt your brain and think for two minutes.

Substantial disruption of UK airports for a few days or 10 wide body aircraft down in one day over major cities with casualty rate probably higher than 9/11.

Its not hard!

[ceedee]

J3314/06 - AUS 06-08-0467/3002/AS3 TEMPORARY RESTRICTED AREA. OWING TO A POLICE INCIDENT A RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS HAS BEEN MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF THE ANO 2005 IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY THE COORDINATES 5140N 00020W (ELSTREE), 5139N 00010E (STAPLEFORD) , 5130N 00010E AND 5130N 00020W. PILOTS ARE FORBIDDEN TO FLY WITHIN THE DESIGNATED AIRSPACE WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY OF THE METROPOLITAN POLICE TELEPHONE 0208 345 4888. EXEMPTED ARE HEMS ACFT, POLICE ACFT, ACFT TRANSITING THE HELI ROUTES AND ARRIVALS AND DEPARTURES TO LONDON HEATHROW, LONDON STANSTED, LONDON CITY, LONDON LUTON, NORTHOLT, ELSTREE, BATTERSEA AND STAPLEFORD. ATC UNITS CLOSE TO THE AREA ARE REQUESTED TO ADVISE AIRCRAFT ON THEIR FREQUENCIES OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTAM. MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP552 201.135.9. SFC 10000FT AMSL 10 AUG 16:07 UNTIL 11 AUG 11:00 ESTIMATED
Interesting that this was issued somewhat late in the day while TV news is parroting that everything is returning to normal...

:rolleyes:

[Avius]

It is a "no win" situation for the security professionals. People will always complain. Today, they are "inconvenienced" due to luggage & delays. Big deal. I'm confident that they would find it "inconvenient" if they or their loved ones find themselves on board an aicraft which is about to be blown out of the sky by an terrorist made device.

I have a very high respect for security professionals and if they deem it right to take any kind of measures to save lives - so be it. No discussion, just comply.

Inevitably, there will be false warnings sometime, but that comes with the teritorry. It is just very hard to find that needle in the haystack.

[A330ismylittlebaby]

Each time the terrorists try a tactic, the specific tactic is blocked by security procedures post hoc. So the terrorists try a new tactic. We then block that.

We had hijackers with pistols, we introduced metal detectors. Then there were hold luggage bombs, so we started screening hold luggage one way and another. Then the hijackers used little knives, so we confiscated nail-clippers. Next we had the shoe-bomber, so now we all have to have our shoes inspected.

And the latest is liquid explosive in bottles, so we ban bottles of water.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm dreading the eventuality of the underwear bomber.

If we ground all commercial flights, they'll attack trains, buses, shopping centres, sports stadia, motorway junctions, churches, synagogues, random crowds of people with truck bombs. And several of these have been committed.

I regret that intelligence-led profiling is now absolutely necessary.

I agree with you on that, i think security should just stop people who are suspicious.

I think they stopped checking shoes well when i worked in the airport 2 years ago. and i think they should start checking shoes again and continue with the high security that we have now.

People say the terrorists have succeeded because they have caused cancellation of flights but in my mind the security services have made me feel alot safer.

Air travel is a luxory and we shouldn't moan about having security checks.
Because at the end of the day, the good people being the general public should be protected from terrorists, and i'm sure the passengers who think about things do appreciate the security.

[FlyingConsultant]

FlyingConsultant
You question the wisdom of banning cell phones. Well lets see, haven't cell phones been used already to set off explosives?

Probably, don't know. But they go through X-Ray. Wouldn't a couple of cables sticking out of a phone into an explosive show up?

Not that I am married to my cell phone, mind you. It just seems to me that if you get a better handle on explosives, you don't need to worry about the trigger. For instance, you could have sniffing dogs at every gate. That would probably increase the cost of a flight by the cost of dog + handler = what - $1,000 pe flight, if that? Add that as security fee, gets you $10/seat or so for a 737 and $2-3 for a 747 (for which you might need two dogs, though). Few will complain because this actually makes sense as it is targeted, useful, visible, and effective. Instead, they try to develop high-tech sniffing machines that are (a) more expensive, (b) slower, (c) at the moment mainly sitting around because they don't work. Low tech, more people is better.

Security screening is good. Not allowing books is just overkill. The rest is just a skill problem. Take Flights out of Frankfurt to the US - EVERYBODY gets hand searched. Nevertheless, the lines at that second screening are rarely longer than 10-15 minutes, and often as short as 5 minutes. Reasonable measure, works well, minimal delay.

[vapilot2004]

So fine, nobody can bring aboard their contact lens solutions, little bottles of alcohol, baby formulas or even :mad: water. :confused:

So Al Q or whatever will now start sticking the stuff up their ar$e ! :ugh:

[NG_Kaptain]

Has anything been decided on crew baggage as yet? Will be going through EGLL this weekend and hope they dont try and take away my laptop and mobile. Being an Airbus "bus driver" I've got all my manuals in my laptop, infact in our company we have no paper manuals.

[Shamrock274]

Has anything been decided on crew baggage as yet? Will be going through EGLL this weekend and hope they dont try and take away my laptop and mobile. Being an Airbus "bus driver" I've got all my manuals in my laptop, infact in our company we have no paper manuals.

good luck, or better start printing he he he he

[Leezyjet]

Couple of quotes on BBC World today :-

David Learmount saying that if you put a bomb on an a/c, then put it near the front like they did on the Lockerbie a/c, then you only need to make a small hole and the a/c will tear itself apart - I'm sure Mr Terrorist may already know that, but no need to broadcast it right round the world !!

Random BBC Journalist saying that i-pods, walkmans and other RADIOACTIVE devices are not allowed.....

:hmm:

[haltonapp]

99.9999% of all passengers present no threat to a flight, is it not time that, despite the PC world we live in, that our lords and masters grasp the nettle and accept that passenger/terrorist profiling would be a prime antedote to the current threat. IMHO a husband, wife and two or whatever young children, present no threat to the other passengers on a flight, apart from the noise they produce!

[Human Factor]

Last time my mother went on holiday, she was singled out for enhanced security screening. 62 years old, white, wife of retired police officer, mother of BA pilot. Obviously easy to mistake her for an Al Qaeda terrorist then..... :rolleyes:

[747-436]

Have heard that some crew aren't even allowed to take calculators and other electronics onboard. Mobile phones allowed though.

Good thing crew don't have access to the aircraft controls!!! Doh! :rolleyes:

[A330ismylittlebaby]

So fine, nobody can bring aboard their contact lens solutions, little bottles of alcohol, baby formulas or even :mad: water. :confused:

So Al Q or whatever will now start sticking the stuff up their ar$e ! :ugh:
If they do that, then the security might be checking up all of our arses, nah i think social profiling etc works to stop the terrorists.

[SaturnV]

99.9999% of all passengers present no threat to a flight, is it not time that, despite the PC world we live in, that our lords and masters grasp the nettle and accept that passenger/terrorist profiling would be a prime antedote to the current threat. IMHO a husband, wife and two or whatever young children, present no threat to the other passengers on a flight, apart from the noise they produce!
Not so easy to profile. Khalid Muhammed, the mastermind of 9/11, planned on using Asians for his second round of hijackings. He anticipated that the U.S. would be rigorously screening Arabs, and paying less attention to Orientals.

The Chechens are/were fond of using females as terrorists and bombers: it was two rather young females who blew up the two airliners several years ago; nearly half the 41 terrorists in the Moscow theatre gassing were female; almost all the street suicide-bombings in Moscow, including the rock concert, were female bombers.

Palestinians have disguised themselves as Hasidic Jews and blown themselves up.

And Richard Reid was half English, half Jamaican.

[MReyn24050]

Just a thought. I guess all the Duty Free and other shops in the Departure Lounges are closed at present?

[Mark Lewis]

Just a thought. I guess all the Duty Free and other shops in the Departure Lounges are closed at present?

No, because I believer you can buy anything airside and take it with you. That is unless you are flying on a flight to the USA.

[MReyn24050]

No, because I believer you can buy anything airside and take it with you. That is unless you are flying on a flight to the USA.

Are our airports that secure that would prevent bottles containing the suspect liquids from being passed by someone employed on the airside being passed to the individuals who are prepared to blow themselves up with the aircraft? If these individuals are that organised I am sure that possibilty has been thought out.

[The Real Slim Shady]

Couldonlyaffordafiver

Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W.
Posts: 914

Last time my mother went on holiday, she was singled out for enhanced security screening. 62 years old, white, wife of retired police officer, mother of BA pilot. Obviously easy to mistake her for an Al Qaeda terrorist then.....

My friend's name is Mohammed. He is of Pakistani origin, born and raised in Yorkshire and he is Muslim.

Why should he be profiled???

[Jonathan Hinkles]

This is just a quick note to say that I have been most impressed today with the way that the BAA team at Gatwick have handled the security alert. I've spent much of the day in the terminal working with our own team and during that time have run into a large number of the BAA senior management and their teams out on the airport concourses talking to and reassuring passengers. Everyone who could be spared - from BAA engineering people, IT staff, management - was out and about to provide a visible presence and armed with a load of plastic bags and information notices to help passengers with the hand baggage restrictions. It even extended to regular bottles of water, chocolate bars and sustenance appearing from behind the BAA scenes to keep check-in and floor staff going whilst they were working to clear the backlog of customers.

The whole effort meant that most airlines (including us) kept their operation going very well in spite of the restrictions. The BAA Gatwick team's spirit and energy which went into keeping today's operations on track was commendable and in the middle of this disruption, should be recognised as a great team effort.

Jonathan Hinkles - Commercial Director, Astraeus

[Brewster Buffalo]

ABC News giving much more detail on this including that 5 further suspects are being sought..though Fox News makes that 10 being sought??

[Mark Lewis]

Are our airports that secure that would prevent bottles containing the suspect liquids from being passed by someone employed on the airside being passed to the individuals who are prepared to blow themselves up with the aircraft? If these individuals are that organised I am sure that possibilty has been thought out.

Yes. As mentioned numerous times above, the crew/staff security is just as stringent as that for pax at the moment.

[FlyingConsultant]

Posting this despite questionable 3rd hand source. It is R&N, after all
from CNN.com
Among those arrested were a Muslim charity worker and a Heathrow Airport employee with an all-area access pass, according to Britain's Channel 4.
Five suspects in the plot are still at large, ABC News, citing U.S. sources, reported on its Web site.

[ExSimGuy]

My friend's name is Mohammed. He is of Pakistani origin, born and raised in Yorkshire and he is Muslim.

Why should he be profiled???
I've posted it before - I'm white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, but I often get "random extra checking" and it doesn't surprise me. I carry a (British) passport that's barely 2 years old but already almost full of Mid-East stamps. I have a beard, and because I work outside a lot in a sunny climate, my skin is usually quite dark.

So I'm "profiled" - I don't mind, it makes sense! It doesn't hurt me or seriously inconvenience me (one less beer in the departure lounge maybe ;) ) and it makes sure that I'm not a Richard Reid (though my beard is usually a lot tidier than his!)

[Banzai Eagle]

I notice that whilst BA/WW/EZY are cancelling flights in their hundreds the charter airlines soldier on despite in some cases massive delays that will take to next week to cure. Might be bad for their pax but at least they will get to destination. The advantages of crews doing a 2 sector PMI rather than a double PMI/EDI....

[chrisbl]

It is easy to be cynical about these terror alerts. But there is stuff going on all the time. People may remember these arrests two years ago.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3575106.stm I think their trial is due to start later this year.
I was interviewed by the police about one of the accused and what these people are doing is truely scary.
How they are going about it is even more concerning.

[cwatters]

I completely understand the "no liquids" rule. I am actually surprised it wasn't like that before - liquid explosives have been around for a while. Buy your water after the security point, please.

Can I just point out that someone official on TV today said liquids purchased after the security point are to be confiscated at the gate.

[cwatters]

Why take beverages off the shelves?

It's not because they think it might contain terrorist materials - it so customers don't get pissed off and argumentative and when it's confiscated at the gate.

[LD Max]

With reference to the new airline security measures imposed at all major airports, I am writing to offer my opinion, for what it's worth. :hmm:

All that is required to counter the threat of liquid explosives carried in bottles - is a marginal adjustment to the inspection procedures for hand luggage. I can see absolutely no need to prevent the carriage of all hand-luggage on commercial flights, and to do so is a major inconvenience and disincentive to travel. They permit baby milk if the accompanying adult can take a swig of it, so why not a bottle of water or coke? It's utterly ridiculous!

I will be going to the US next month and my laptop is NOT going in the hold for some baggage handler to either steal or break. Unless the restrictions are lifted by then, I will have no option but to leave it at home. This is entirely unreasonable and I am amazed to witness such an apparently unintelligent overreaction to such a well-defined threat - especially as this threat was already identified and succesfully averted.

I'm sorry to sound so abrupt, but I never cease to be frustrated by the almost carefree way the aviation industry is made to jump through hoops - which by and large are entirely unnecessary. I appreciate this was a major terrorist plot which the police uncovered, but the DoT's response to it has the hallmarks of a Knee-Jerk reaction.

While many, if not most, of the travelling general public will accept enhanced security measures to almost any degree in the name of "safety", it is also true that most of the general public are easily "spooked" by events surrounding air travel. That's no reason for the government to think that gives them the green light to cause such crippling disruption on a whim.

I think a lot of it is "posturing" and PR.

"Look how clever we are to stop terrorists".
"See how powerful we are to close airports and stop you carrying on board luggage"
"See how important we are to have such authority"

Makes me SICK. :yuk:

[DISCOKID]

Well the no hand luggage is a fabulous idea - once people get the message security will speed up significantly and not only that loading of planes will be much quicker too - no more waiting while people try to squeeze blatantly oversized bags into the overhead lockers.

LDMAX - the reason for not allowing coke or water is that you would then be delayed even more while every single person with any sort of bottle had to open it and drink some. And if your laptop is so precious perhaps you should leave it at home... i've travelled every week with mine shoved in the middle of my suitcase no problem.

Frankly its quite unbelievable that people are complaining about these measures - the threat may not yet have been fully averted hence why you should be happy these measures are in place.

[icarus5]

I have just travelled today having compulsarily checked in my nav bags . Going though security I was picked up with a bag of Fishermans friends containing about six sweets. These were confiscated as a potential hazard despite that I was prepared to eat one.Hving gone through security and into the duty free lounge I was actively encouraged to buy glass bottles of spirits.
Which meant that I could have easily bought two glass bottles of say vodka, taken them on board, smashed them, set the liquid alight and used the broken glass as a weapon.However my blunt ended scissors were considered far more dangerous and confiscated from me.
No doubt Tony Blair will be rubbing his hands saying I told you so.All leaders of countries know that a way of controlling the masses is by having some external threat which allegedly they are dealing with.That's why the US having lost Russia have had to provoke another enemy/threat i.e. Al-Quaeda. It helps to keep the masses under control.
When Thatcher's ratings were at an all time low, causing the Falklands war put her back at the top of the ratings.
Our so called "Intellegence organisation" seem consistently to get things incredibly wrong. I hope this is not another "menendes" ( forgive spelling).
Or am I being cynical and thinking this is another way tony blair and his government are trying to justify their stance on the middle east and Iraq/Afghanistan?
The result is a hell of a lot of people are not going to fly anymore which I suppose will help the governments green house gas emissions.

[Guern]

I used to get stopped on a regular basis in the late 80's early 90's when travelling with a colleague who was from Northern Island. Never bothered us we both understood why we were stopped, he was from NI and I was travelling with him. Few questions and then we were on our way.

That was GCI to LGW or reverse, or if we had been on a course in City of London that finished on a Saturday afternoon (when hardly anyone else was about in that part of London) and leaving to head back to LGW and we were walking down street with big bags (full of two weeks washing!) on way to train station no probs if police stopped us and took an interest because of my mates accent.

Never bothered us, we both understood that the IRA were planting bombs in London so no problem helping police protect public (including us). Not so sure they enjoyed looking through our smelly washing!

Anything that the security services can do to make life safer is fine by me.

[LD Max]

Never bothered us, we both understood that the IRA were planting bombs in London so no problem helping police protect public (including us). Not so sure they enjoyed looking through our smelly washing!
Anything that the security services can do to make life safer is fine by me.

Not the same thing is it... I don't mind queueing, body searched, sniffed, scanned or x-rayed. But proportionate measures please! :rolleyes:

This is just madness.

[Globaliser]

Not so easy to profile. Khalid Muhammed, the mastermind of 9/11, planned on using Asians for his second round of hijackings. He anticipated that the U.S. would be rigorously screening Arabs, and paying less attention to Orientals.

The Chechens are/were fond of using females as terrorists and bombers: it was two rather young females who blew up the two airliners several years ago; nearly half the 41 terrorists in the Moscow theatre gassing were female; almost all the street suicide-bombings in Moscow, including the rock concert, were female bombers.

Palestinians have disguised themselves as Hasidic Jews and blown themselves up.

And Richard Reid was half English, half Jamaican.And it seems that the pro-profilers have all forgotten one Mr Hindawi, who was supposed to be flying to Tel Aviv from Heathrow.

I'll be corrected if I've got any of this wrong. But IIRC, he was clean as a whistle. All the profiling in the world would not have found that which he did not have. His pregnant Irish girlfriend, on another flight, was obviously low risk. She got through standard airport security. But she was unwittingly carrying the bomb that he'd made, and was only picked up by LY who caught that at the gate.

Fat lot of use profiling would have been in that case.

[Guern]

Not the same thing is it... I don't mind queueing, body searched, sniffed, scanned or x-rayed. But proportionate measures please! :rolleyes:
This is just madness.

Can't see why you think this is madness? Surely one plane down is one plane too many, and one person injured/killed is one to many. Any measures deemed necessary to stop an attack are fine by me. Surely madness would be to risk any opportunity for these B*stards to hurt anyone?

Surely anything that makes the world safer is good for everyone? Yes it is inconvenient but that is better that being killed surely?

I could have objected to being checked just because I happened to be travelling with someone from NI when I was travelling back home to my little rock where I was born but why should I if I had nothing to hide?

As I understand it today we will be having the same restrictions on inter Channel Islands Flights on Tri-landers do we moan no we don't! Hardly think that there is a high chance of terrorists on inter CI flights in a BN Tri but if it is required we do the same then fine.

[SFI145]

Presumably for any pax with some flexibility this is the end of long haul travel from UK airports. I suppose if at all possible all pax will suffer a short flight to BRU, AMS or CDG and then do the long haul with another carrier with all the usual carry-on stuff?
What do you think?

[ZBMAN]

And it seems that the pro-profilers have all forgotten one Mr Hindawi, who was supposed to be flying to Tel Aviv from Heathrow.

I'll be corrected if I've got any of this wrong. But IIRC, he was clean as a whistle. All the profiling in the world would not have found that which he did not have. His pregnant Irish girlfriend, on another flight, was obviously low risk. She got through standard airport security. But she was unwittingly carrying the bomb that he'd made, and was only picked up by LY who caught that at the gate.

Fat lot of use profiling would have been in that case.

The Israelis have become experts on profiling and this has been used succesfuly with El Al for a number of years. The security measures whe see today are both inefective and disproportionate. All this could be avoided, but this would require vastly improved training for our beloved security officers.
Well done MI5 for having foiled this attack, but I sure hope these increased security measures will be removed soon, and not become semi-permanent. Our jobs are hard enough without having to put up with the over zealousness of some security officers at certain uk airports. Fed up of being treated like a potential terrorist, especially after having to jump through the hoops for my airside pass application/renewal.:ugh:

[andyafc]

I work as security at LTN and when u see a bottle on the xray machine come thrw u cannot tell whether its water, coke or something else so i agree with these measures and long may they continue, hang luggage should be one little bag ot loads of big bags

[cockpitvisit]

LDMAX - the reason for not allowing coke or water is that you would then be delayed even more while every single person with any sort of bottle had to open it and drink some.
What's the problem with that? As I recall, on Japan domestic flights they make you put every bottle from the carryon into some machine - and their domestic airport operations are very efficient, you surely don't have to come 3 hours in advance.
The question is, is it possible for the terrorist to drink all bomb ingredients and stay alive? Maybe drinking from the bottle is not enough to ensure it is safe.
And if your laptop is so precious perhaps you should leave it at home... i've travelled every week with mine shoved in the middle of my suitcase no problem.
The problem with the laptop is that the liability of the airline for the checked baggage is lower than the value of the replacement for most laptop types. And if the baggege "just" gets delayed for a few days, there is no compensation for the laptop at all, while it would ruin almost every business trip. A slightly lesser evil is the inability to work inflight. Or maybe we should just be happy that the small criminal minority of baggage handlers are (hopefully) just thieves and not terrorists.
I think there is not much else the authorities could do today with the exact nature of the threat unknown and some terrorists reportedly still at large (apart from halting all air traffic altoghether), but I hope they will come with a less intrusive solution very soon.

[CFD]

ok extra security for pax, i was subject to this today.Although for some reason more procedures for departing uk than inbound.
What I dont understand is just what is the point of security passes.Recently had disclosure scotland for pass renewal.If this is of any use whatsoever why are the crew subject to the same procedures as pax.Witnessed today the crew carrying essential items only in clear plastic bags.No food,(i refuse to have the choice of 2 different flavoured sandwiches carried by my company for the rest of my career) consficated by security ( ark royal totallly agree) captain only mobile, no keys with immobiliser thingy, all crew left bags unsecured in crew room ( will insurance cough up with car nicked)?Crew searched shoes removed etc.As someone said to me today they wouldnt need anything special, they have control of the aircraft.
Please do not take this to mean that crew should not be subject to security, they should.I just question whether the disclosure scotland actually achieved anything.If the pass means anything at all then the same security checks should not be required, if it doesnt then up the security disclosure, maybe in the uk we should have been trialing iris scans, fingerprints etc for passes rather than passports.
If it carries on like this perhaps we should just carry passports rather than passes and carry on being subject to the same scrutiny as pax rather than professioinal aircrew.
Purely for discussion who decides that armed marshalls are ok on our aircraft and armed police airside and why cant as professionals we have the same investigation into our characters as they presumably have with the same curtesy extended to us just trying to do our jobs.

Head down and waiting to be shot down!

[Mark1234]

I work as security at LTN and when u see a bottle on the xray machine come thrw u cannot tell whether its water, coke or something else so i agree with these measures and long may they continue, hang luggage should be one little bag ot loads of big bags

Sure, and when the airlines can guarantee they will deliver all my baggage to the same place as me, complete, undamaged and on-time, I will happily do so in the name of security, even though I think the arguament is fatuous - why not put the bomb in the hold baggage, works just as well.

Until then, I routinely (until now at least) travel with my valuables (laptop, camera kit etc.) toothbrush and a change of underwear in handbaggage. Never mind the replacement costs of these things, underwear aside there's also a lot of irreplacable information there.

To the man who checks in his laptop - you obviously don't *NEED* to take it with you.

Personally I think 'they' have already won - by demostrating repeatedly that they can bring the functioning of half the country to it's knees on a whim.. who needs body count when you can do that?

[shattered paradigm]

Don't buy the lies. It's all about timing. This has been timed to coincide with the anoucement that they want to increase spending on arms. As well as the losing freedoms to protect our freedoms doublespeak speach by John Reid. You do not protect liberty by imposing restrictions on freedoms, you just demonstrate a sympton of a fascist tyranical dictatorship.

Mix it all up with some FEAR inducing reports on the TV to coincide with rush hour traffic. Hopefully this psychological manipulation operation will backfire and it will awaken more people to the false left right political paradigm that exists to control, contain, exploit and oppress humanity.

If people want to see a good expose of the lies and false flag operations carried out by governments against their own populations then do a search for terrorstorm by alex jones on googlevideo. Another good source is Michael Tsarion who has a very good presentation on google video at the moment.

He links many different disciplines together, in a coherrent concise articulate delivery of the history and reasons behind what is taking place in the current era. The presentation is called
Live in LA (2012-The future of Mankind)
and can be found on video.google.com

[Danny]

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.

The one argument I would like to see discussed further is that of how this is affecting flight crew. We have already heard about pilots having to take only essentials in a clear plastic bag. For some of us, we have to take our hold baggage with us to the a/c and security screeners at the crew control checkpoints are forbidding anything going through that could, in theory, be transferred from the hold baggage to our 'plastic bags' after passing through screening. That means that those of us who fly long haul will not be allowed to take anything such as shampoo, toothpaste, deodorants 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 all those things behind 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.

Now, I have long advocated for intelligent profiling. Note, I did not say racial profiling or any of the other misquoted types of 'profiling' that some posters seem unable to figure out. Intelligent profiling is not cheap and is labour intensive as the training is difficult and does not allow for the lowest common denominator factor of the MacDonalds type of recruitment to fill the ranks. What intelligent profilers are able to do is use not only psychological profiling but also intelligent (as in intelligence services)profiling. Whilst some PC lobbyists will cry foul the important thing to remember is that this type of profiling, when carried out by highly trained profilers with the proper kind of intelligence back-up, is very successful.

In the past we have heard the usual arguments that it would not work anywhere as busy as the UK or the USA and is only successful in places such as Israel with El Al because it would cause too much chaos and cost too much. Well, having landed in LHR yesterday morning as the current crisis was unfolding and then trying to get a flight up to MAN to get home, I only had to look around to see how expensive the current method of attacking the problem is and the chaos that that causes.

So, getting back to the problem that I see with screening us as pilots when we are trying to get to our a/c, we have a serious problem and many of us are not too happy with the current policy of applying flawed logic and just banning us from taking basic essentials with us on board for use down route. We have all been screened for security reasons and are trusted with multi million doallr pieces of equipment and hundreds of pax lives every time we go to work. If the agencies that oversee security cannot figure out a system, especially where we have our own security screening, to allow us to carry what we need without subjecting us to ridiculous rules that defeat all logic then we have a serious problem. If we carry armed sky marshals, are they subjected to the same ridiculous screening? Why not have a profiler deal with the crew instead of leaving it to a blanket ban on things such as nail clippers and bottles of shampoo.

Either we are security cleared and trusted or we are not. We are expected to operate safely and have a lot of responsibility. It would appear that the authorities are incapable of sorting this anomaly out which tells us a lot about their real capabilities. That is not to detract from the services that were involved with the background operations to prevent the current situation from materialising. However, observing the current knee-jerk reactions leaves little faith in those that decide on how to handle the crew who have to operate under these conditions. :ugh:

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Danny, perhaps we need to wait a little and see if these additional restrictions do get lifted when Britain comes off "Critical" alert. But if not - if they remain in force - what about some form of petition initiated through this website? To attempt to achieve separate screening of crew. To allow carry-on luggage by crew (I know that here in Aus the domestic network will grind to a halt if crew are required to recheck bags prior to EACH of 4 to 5 sectors per day!). To push for a global system of reconciling the names/faces of a flight's authorised crew with the personnel that are attempting to enter EACH particular airframe.

Such a petition could comprise of hundreds, hopefully thousands, of professional airline pilots from around the world. You have a lot of them reading here each day.

My company is pushing us to go electronic manuals. 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-wheels? Calculators? All needed. Sun-cream: yes, many of us use it to prevent an early cancer death. A sandwich on the 10 hour days when the company provides us jack s..t in the way of food... Carry on bottles of any sort by crew are already banned at Qantas because management think we'll use them to steal company stores. It's a sackable offence...... :mad: :ugh:

This cannot be allowed to take hold for long in one part of the world or else the rest will surely follow. A global effort by pilots may well be needed. Frankly it's high time we collectively stood up and said "enough".

Just planting the idea for now.......

[Plastic Bug]

Right after 9/11 in reaction to the attacks, the rules that came out basically prohibited mechanics from having tools on board the aircraft.:ugh:
That lasted about a day, when every sane person figured out that tools were required to fix airplanes.:D
If you are a person who operates with an EFB and they tell you that you may not bring your laptop on board, well, guess what? It'll be a very short trip.:mad:
So, cool your jets, I am sure that someone, somewhere, will realize the flaw in the initial policy and let up.:D
What everyone needs to remember is that while the image we all have of ourselves is that we are who we are and naturally deserve full and unrestricted access to our aircraft, the security staff have no clue as to who we are.
They have never met us, don't know us and don't want to know us. Anyone can buy a uniform and present themselves as someone that they are not. The only way the security people can be, well, safe in their position , is to treat everyone as suspect. That's pretty freaking creepy, but I can assure you that the people that would do us harm would exploit any opportunity to slip through, including donning a uniform with fake/stolen ID.
We're rolling up to 9/11 plus five now and the number of people who forget/forgot/don't know the event is disturbing. Then we have a section of the population who with immense patience and an urge to kill us normal folk.
That second group, creatures really, are still trying to either kill us or drive us crazy.
The first group would like it all to just go away. It ain't going away. I just wish we could harness the collective energy spent complaining about the security measures caused by group number 2 and direct it at them instead of ourselves, our countries and our governments.
Lay the blame and anger where it belongs.
PB

[Loose rivets]

Danny's last post echoed an impassioned post that I put forward years ago. Treating aircrew like criminals and fools is unacceptable. In the last twenty years, I have heard every kind of banal argument put forward for reducing us to the lowest common denominator. It has become little more than ‘us and them' sparring. With the crew's hands bound by some sort of subservient interpretation of professionalism. This has got to stop. Aircrew should be vetted to the n'th degree, yes...and then given the security status that is commensurate with the job.

The public are bewildered and confused at the treatment of the people that are about to take responsibility for their lives. It sends out all sorts of mixed messages...and I ask you to think about that issue for a moment.

Leading up to this last crisis, it sounds as though a lot of good work has been going on in the background. Congratulations to the police and other security agencies world-wide. However, I have just left a room full of people that have to travel quite frequently. They represented a small sample of the mainstay of business travelers in the US. The thing that phased them more than anything, came as a surprise to me.

It was not the lap-top or the phone, that was bad enough, but simply drinking water. Ordinary sip when you please, water.

They were not athletes, but academics and many were seasoned travelers. They were very aware of the importance of staying hydrated, some having spent all too long in the past, cooking on one of those interminable taxi periods, with cabin crew unable to leave their seats. ‘If there is no water, I'm not going.' one of them said.

This problem has to be addressed immediately. We need their custom.

At very little cost, folk who have just discarded their bottles of fluids, could be given security cleared water on entry to the cabin. Hopefully it will be a temporary measure and in any event, not too costly.

It seems that the enemy is very aware of testing our own fluid procedures, and have devised bottles to contain carefully colored-matched substances under a level of drinking fluid. A thin tube allows one substance to pass another. Yes, the only quick way is to scrap the lot...but there has to be a replacement.

The hundreds of medium haul pax rely on NOT checking in any bags–simply to make the unreal connection times. Many will be hit with another day added to their week just on this inconvenience alone.

[Capt H Peacock]

Whilst I completely understand the unacceptable frustration caused to passengers, the impact on crews has now reached a level where the stress of meaningless security and extra delays is in danger of affecting the safety of the operation.

I cannot accept that the public screening of flight crew for the gratification or amusement of the passengers justifies the disruption to the safety critical path of departure, turnaround, and rest. Try doing it four times a day.

I would like to see dedicated use of staff security searches out of the public gaze. Our personal credentials are checked more often than almost any other individuals. Surely there must be some acceptance that we are already vetted?

Security should be a partnership between the authorities and the operating crews. There should be mutual trust, there increasingly isn't.

[THE POINTY END]

Any FR guys been refused entry with their own personal water yet? As Ryanair don't supply crew water, we have to bring our own. Now of course we can't take liquid aboard. Will they let us take empty bottles to fill up in the base airside, or are we doomed to a life of dehydration?
Personally, I'm sick to death of being treated in the same way as a potential beardy weirdy extremist. These people unfortunately are British citizens, but as they say, just because a dog is born in a stable, doesn't mean it's a f***ing horse!

[ZFT]

Whilst I completely understand the unacceptable frustration caused to passengers, the impact on crews has now reached a level where the stress of meaningless security and extra delays is in danger of affecting the safety of the operation.
I cannot accept that the public screening of flight crew for the gratification or amusement of the passengers justifies the disruption to the safety critical path of departure, turnaround, and rest. Try doing it four times a day.
I would like to see dedicated use of staff security searches out of the public gaze. Our personal credentials are checked more often than almost any other individuals. Surely there must be some acceptance that we are already vetted?
Security should be a partnership between the authorities and the operating crews. There should be mutual trust, there increasingly isn't.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s always struck me as incredibly stupid to subject Flight Crews to the indignity of a public security search. They should at least be afforded the respect of a dedicated and private screening.

[A330ismylittlebaby]

ok extra security for pax, i was subject to this today.Although for some reason more procedures for departing uk than inbound.
What I dont understand is just what is the point of security passes.Recently had disclosure scotland for pass renewal.If this is of any use whatsoever why are the crew subject to the same procedures as pax.Witnessed today the crew carrying essential items only in clear plastic bags.No food,(i refuse to have the choice of 2 different flavoured sandwiches carried by my company for the rest of my career) consficated by security ( ark royal totallly agree) captain only mobile, no keys with immobiliser thingy, all crew left bags unsecured in crew room ( will insurance cough up with car nicked)?Crew searched shoes removed etc.As someone said to me today they wouldnt need anything special, they have control of the aircraft.
Please do not take this to mean that crew should not be subject to security, they should.I just question whether the disclosure scotland actually achieved anything.If the pass means anything at all then the same security checks should not be required,

Head down and waiting to be shot down!

The security pass isn't there to say you are not carrying anything dangerous, it is there to say hey what are you doing outside near the plane or what are you doing in that store room. that's why we carry the passes, and i only worked in the duty free shop but that's the reason you have a pass, you should still be checked going through security, even the security check eachother.

[Biggles' Apprentice]

ALI, Abdula, Ahmed
Date of birth (DOB): 10/10/1980
Address: Walthamstow, London, E17

ALI, Cossor
DOB: 04/12/1982
Address: Walthamstow, London, E17

ALI, Shazad, Khuram
DOB: 11/06/1979
Address: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

HUSSAIN, Nabeel
DOB: 10/03/1984
Address: London, E4

HUSSAIN, Tanvir
DOB: 21/02/1981
Address: Leyton, London, E10

HUSSAIN, Umair
DOB: 09/10/1981
Address: London, E14

ISLAM, Umar
DOB: 23/04/1978
Address: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

KAYANI, Waseem
DOB: 28/04/1977
Address: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

KHAN, Assan, Abdullah
DOB: 24/10/1984
Address: London, E17

KHAN, Waheed, Arafat
DOB: 18/05/1981
Address: London, E17

KHATIB, Osman, Adam
DOB: 07/12/1986
Address: London, E17

PATEL, Abdul, Muneem
DOB: 17/04/1989
Address: London, E5

RAUF, Tayib
DOB: 26/04/1984
Address: Birmingham

SADDIQUE, Muhammed, Usman
DOB: 23/04/1982
Address: Walthamstow, London, E17

SARWAR, Assad
DOB: 24/05/1980
Address: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

SAVANT, Ibrahim
DOB: 19/12/1980
Address: London, E17

TARIQ, Amin, Asmin
DOB: 07/06/1983
Address: Walthamstow, London, E17

UDDIN, Shamin, Mohammed
DOB: 22/11/1970
Address: Stoke Newington, London

ZAMAN, Waheed
DOB: 27/05/1984
Address: London, E17





Seemingly they'll do anything to try and win the fourth test, the b**gers.

[ajamieson]

so you can go through security ,buy duty free booze, electronic goods in duty free and then get on a flight from the uk airports taking these items into the cabin.
i have read through the government guidance and don't see any wording to prevent this. The gov't statement refers only to hand baggage going through security, not duty free goods purchased airside.
Perhaps an extra five minutes thought by ministers may have cleared up this confussion - can anyone shed any light on the above statement. Please!!
Yes, I checked this with the DfT yesterday. Your understanding is correct.

You're allowed to take almost nothing through security apart from yourself and a very small list of essential items. If you're not going to the US, you can then go mad with the credit card airside and buy anything you like. If you are going to the US, you can still go on a spending spree but you'll have liquids taken off you at the gate and you'll undergo a very long secondary security search for the rest.

[Liam Gallagher]

Spies close to the author say a BA crew and its 80 passengers are stuck in the Arrival Hall of LAX as they wait for their hold luggage to scanned [B]INBOUND.:confused: Spies say it been over 2 hours and counting.........

Poor blighters.....

[GearDown&Locked]

So pax and crew can only board half-naked, no bottles, cases, laptops, blah blah blah ad nauseam...

I just have a little question: Is the catering being screened as hard as everything else?

[Kirstey]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/220/220381_muslim_pilot_kicked_off_jet_in_terror_alert.html

Any thoughts on this? Certainly fulfils the thread criteria of "affecting aircrew"

[Rwy in Sight]

I wonder how many crews run out of hours yesterday and even more important they reach the a/c tired and frustrated (unfit to fly) because of the frustration due to the controls.


Rwy in Sight

[SpringbokDreamer]

The big problem for me is the injustice of it all.. yes I realise these BAS:mad: DS need stopping and probably stringing up... By the Balls! But how can one set of crew have their food confiscated along with having to leave their phones laptops PDA's in the crew room (If they're lucky enough to be at their home base) and another set of crew who work for the same Airline operating from another base, be able to take on their food and phones?
If we wanted to put the People in danger surely we don't need some Sloppy S:mad: t in a bottle. We've got the A/P disengage button and hey bloody presto!!! :sad:
COME ON PEOPLE be sensible don't put the PAX in any more danger give us a break (KIT KAT!!):ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[LLuke]

I guess I must be one of the few, but I always travelled with no handluggage. Just my wallet, phone, sunglasses and a pen. All the rest; CLA, housekeys, laptop, etc, travel below in my suitcase. Must say that I never noticed too much stuff in my collegues business cases as well apart from an apple, laptop and ussually a magazine (about yachts or cars :-) Only flew sectors of less then 5 hrs though and my company does carry newspapers.

[Stallspincrashburn]

Dear Sir,

I was planning to travel from Manchester, UK, to Chicago on Tuesday. I was planning on taking about 60,000 litres of liquid explosive with me. However, as I can't be trusted with a tube of toothpaste I very much doubt that I'll be allowed to carry Jet A1.:ugh:

I suppose that we could always swim the Atlantic instead!

[eidah]

Had most things taken away from me yesterday at the security point, calculator, cigarettes,aftershave, toothpaste, drinks etc etc was told I could come back at the end of the day and pick them up yeah right u expect me to find my stuff amongst every other airliners workers stuff by 12.00 yesterday there was so much stuff there to top it all I could buy everything I had given to the security point in the shop airside which had probably gone through the same check point beforehand:ugh:

[sugden]

I cannot accept that the public screening of flight crew for the gratification or amusement of the passengers

You think that's why they're doing it? Deflate your ego and think coherently.

This is OTT for crew (not witnessed it first hand yet, but not looking forward to it). No question. It should be stopped.

But without wishing to disagree with Danny, what happens to pax matters to us longer term. Make it too hard for them to fly and they won't. I dunno the answer, but how many airline bookings were taken yesterday and so far today? Same as normal, or less. I'll bet less, coz people are saying "there's no way I want to go through that."

And if they don't fly, we don't fly.

There is clearly a threat and we need to confront it and deal with it. When i go to work I don't want to think that I am ferrying my killer to his and my mutual death.

But we have to get the response right. Given the lunacy of the terrorits, where does the excessive screening stop. Not the pilot, ok? Us reasonable people want that. But what if his enthic back-ground is Pakistani? Maybe we carry on screening him. Except that might be racist. Or whatever else. A pre-conception founded on simplistic views of the problem, which is what got us into this in the first place (a little bit of politics...)

And the cabin crew? Shall we exempt them? No, they're possibly nutters who want to blow the plane up. But the pilots def ain't. So the cabin crew get super screening, the pilots don't. That'll go down like a bucket of cold sick. Just coz they're in the cabin doesn't make them nutters, so why are they still subject to the heavy duty stuff?

Sorry, one rule for flight crew and one for the rest don't wash. We all need to go through security that is fit for purpose, no exceptions. That includes us because among our number will be one nutter.

The key thing is "fit for purpose". The chaos we currently see is not fit for purpose, not for us, not for pax, not for the UK based aviation industry. And that bothers me from a hassle perspective, a stress perspective and a job security perspective.

Enough of the hyperbolic over-reaction. I mean, our airport security was not even breached. be calm, take a deep breath, let's see what we really think we need to do.

BTW LD Max, good points, all well made. Would you be transport Sec please.

[lexxity]

Kirstey that story is the pits. :yuk:

On standby, is flight deck for a partner airline, was taken off the plane for being Muslim. Now there is your prime example of over reaction.

[Carnage Matey!]

And the cabin crew? Shall we exempt them? No, they're possibly nutters who want to blow the plane up. But the pilots def ain't. So the cabin crew get super screening, the pilots don't.

Last time I checked the cabin crew didn't have the capability to fly the plane into a target of their choosing. I do. Whether I've got my electronic key fob with me or not.

[carousel]

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2001/12/26/image322435x.jpg

Mr Reid was screened for travel on two flights by profiler's, on both occasions he was removed from the flight. Unfortunatly the second time the airline GSC overuled the profiling company and allowed him to fly.

[Bob Mckenzie]

Yes, the Pilots should be given special consideration. As it has been pointed out in previous posts, we have control of the aircraft that contains thousands of liters of a volatile liquid.

No beverages. That's fine, as long as I can be supplied with bottled water on board. The food issue is different. I have food allergies and have therefore always self catered. I have a Pilot friend that is hypo-glycemic and has a very specialized diet that also requires him to self cater (before the non-pilot community asks, I'll state that he is allowed to be a Professional Pilot with this condition with the restriction on his License that he is only permitted to operate as part of a two person crew, i.e. no single Pilot).

Policemen walk through security with their Automatic weapons. This is allowed because they have a uniform and ID. The security people do not know them. Why should it be different for Pilots? It would be much harder to impersonate a Pilot to the point where you have control of the aircraft in flight than it would be to impersonate a Police officer.

This is madness!
BM

:ugh: ( I think the forum is running out of this particular smile)

[Capt.Slackbladder]

Havn't we seen this all before with the inconsistancy and interpretation of the new rules by different UK Airports when applied to Flight Deck and Cabin Crew? I gather at certain airports I can take my flight bag and my mobile through with me but can't at others. Today I am already hearing in our crew rooms of total nonsence.
Example 1 - empty positioning flight, both pilots nightstopping on arrival. Told that their nav bags and holdalls had to go in hold! Bags duly delivered to a/c but because it being a positioner on a remote stand the holds are not open and there is no conveyer belt or loaders, so....where do the bags go???? - in the flight deck of course where they should be! (and before anybody asks the holds are security checked by our engineers!)

Example 2:- two of our a/c parked alongside each other at certain UK airport.
One has locally based crew with all their stuff in plastic bags the other has just arrived on a 'W' pattern. Both crews de-plane at same time and walk through terminal together one with plastic bags the other with their usual kit!
Now what does that tell the passengers?

Example 3: Gather there was an interesting discussion at one crew security point when a Thomson Capt was allowed to take his Laptop through with him because they are Co. issued and used for essential duties like Perf. and loading but following was one of our crews who wasn't allowed to take his because it wasn't Co. issued - but how would security know?

I sincerely hope that the industries CEO's and Ops Directors, in their meeting with the Govt today, have tried to get some common sense on the agenda.

[Yallah]

Er - ground staff (ie security with their qualifications) telling the Captain of an aircraft what he needs to do his job. Hey guys get a life. I am sure the ANO lays down what is required by law in the cockpit. Apart from that if you 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.

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.

[Jockflyer]

I did a nightstop last night. Crew bags had to be checked in, with special tags attached. No flight bags allowed, I only took my headset, pens, kneeboard and calculator. Did I miss not having my flight case? Not at all. I flew 6 sectors, and didn't miss a thing. Just shows, we carry all sorts of crap around that we don't actually need. I didn't feel inconvenienced at all.
That said, for flight crew its a bit of a joke. If I wanted to kill a few people, then the fire axe would take care of my colleague next to me, and on short finals DTO the terminal, and I reckon I could take out a few thousand.
One of my colleagues was refused through security with a half eaten packet of Jelly Babies. Wonderful!
JF:D

[Danny]

I'm not sure which bit of: 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. some of you don't understand but it really is a waste of your time and mine if I have to keep deleting twenty or thirty posts at a time because you are debating things that are not for this forum. :*

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. :hmm:

[GreatCircle]

Yesterday, here's what happened to me and my crew:

- One kitkat, opened, and taken
- One half eaten toffee crisp (mine), chucked
- A bottle of tylenol - basically aspirin, told couldnt be taken on
- A discussion between the screeners about my shoes (smelly yes, threat no - well maybe to health)
- made to take off my wing badge (has a needle clip on the back, and caused yet another :mad: discussion
- a significant poke around my hat
- laptops - lets not go there
- ladies "items" for one of our more mature flight attendants, examined in a most unflattering manner
- told not to question UK policy....for my own good ( name of screener taken, written down and damning report made - let's see where that ends up)
- a gun totting police officer in a fetching shade of navy blue, threatening in the distance, and without asking, looking at my 2 sets of ID already shown to the screeners...

In other words, total carnage.

Look, as crews, we all understand the safety and security piece, and we all know we are in a very privileged position operating metal tubes stuffed full of petrol, gas or whatever you want it call it...but commonsense has to come into play somewhere. Perhaps I should have become a train driver...or engineer in these parts....

P.S. As passengers are our living - i.e. without them, we starve, a little more understanding on how they are feeling might be appreciated.

[eidah]

Policeman walk through security with their Automatic weapons. This is allowed because they have a uniform and ID. The security people do not know them. Why should it be different for Pilots? It would be much harder to impersonate a Pilot to the point where you have control of the aircraft in flight than it would be to impersonate a Police officer.
This is madness!
BM



Are BAA staff subjected to the same measures as the crew. Who checks the security staff who is to say one of them is not a terrorist what a great opotunity they let there mate through who is a terrorist. I know they have to be security wise however at the moment its madness I hear now crew are allowed to take food through the staff entrances but not liquids and how long is all this going to carry on for??

[GreatCircle]

Policeman walk through security with their Automatic weapons. This is allowed because they have a uniform and ID. The security people do not know them. Why should it be different for Pilots? It would be much harder to impersonate a Pilot to the point where you have control of the aircraft in flight than it would be to impersonate a Police officer.
This is madness!
BM



Are BAA staff subjected to the same measures as the crew. Who checks the security staff who is to say one of them is not a terrorist what a great opotunity they let there mate through who is a terrorist. I know they have to be security wise however at the moment its madness I hear now crew are allowed to take food through the staff entrances but not liquids and how long is all this going to carry on for??

Believe one of those apprehended in the UK sweep was the holder of an airside pass at EGLL....

[DH121]

IF A PILOT WANTS TO DO A 9/11, BUT BIGGER, NOTHING, BUT NOTHING, CAN STOP HIM/HER.

All we want to do is get on with our jobs, Security is in our interests, but let's have some reason applied to it, please. Security should be working with us, not alienating us.:ugh:

[chandlers dad]

I did a nightstop last night. Crew bags had to be checked in, with special tags attached. No flight bags allowed, I only took my headset, pens, kneeboard and calculator. Did I miss not having my flight case? Not at all. I flew 6 sectors, and didn't miss a thing. Just shows, we carry all sorts of crap around that we don't actually need. I didn't feel inconvenienced at all.
That said, for flight crew its a bit of a joke. If I wanted to kill a few people, then the fire axe would take care of my colleague next to me, and on short finals DTO the terminal, and I reckon I could take out a few thousand.
One of my colleagues was refused through security with a half eaten packet of Jelly Babies. Wonderful!
JF:D

One thing that we are missing here is that the major reason we carry so much stuff (and some of it very expensive) is that when its checked below... ITS STOLEN by the ground staff when checked!

Its written into our ops manual that we have to carry all our electronic items (cell phone, blackberry, laptop) as "carry on" luggage due to many losses where the flight was grounded due to theft.

As well when I am picking up a "green" airplane at the factory I ALWAYS carry a hand held GPS as a backup just in case the screens go dark up front. Now they want me to DR my way across the Atlantic with no backup? They can go screw themselves and this is rediclous to throw safety out of the window when worrying that the flight crew cannot be trusted with anything electronic while they are sitting in the cockpit surrounded by the controls of the plane.

This is going to mushroom once things settle down and the losses will be enormous, and the back lash will cause the pax to either stop flying or demand changes. These "knee jerk" reactions are crazy and as JF says, we have a crash axe in the cockpit that is far more dangerous than anything we have been allowed to have on the plane in the last 5-6 years.

[MaxReheat]

Blah, blah, moan, moan, whinge, whinge (again) about the illogical and farsical security charade flightcrew have to go through on a daily basis. But we take this carp every day like sheep - so what are we, the thousands of crew who ultimately keep this aviation industry running, going to do about it? Unless the unions are prepared to take action (direct if need be) which in turn will bring pressure on airline managements to sort out this ongoing fiasco with the faceless blunties parked at their desks in Whitehall, there will never be any change. Threaten a series of one day, national stoppages until special procedures for aircrew are negotiated - then you'll see an improvement.:D

[A330ismylittlebaby]

Blah, blah, moan, moan, whinge, whinge (again) about the illogical and farsical security charade flightcrew have to go through on a daily basis. But we take this carp every day like sheep - so what are we, the thousands of crew who ultimately keep this aviation industry running, going to do about it? Unless the unions are prepared to take action (direct if need be) which in turn will bring pressure on airline managements to sort out this ongoing fiasco with the faceless blunties parked at their desks in Whitehall, there will never be any change. Threaten a series of one day, national stoppages until special procedures for aircrew are negotiated - then you'll see an improvement.:D
I'm sure the majority of the public who actually keep air travel running and keep pilots in jobs will want everyone to be security checked.

I mean maybe they check pilots just incase someone has forged or stolen a security pass and put a pilots uniform on. I really don't know why but everyone including the public need to put ideas forward on how to deal with this.

[GreatCircle]

Blah, blah, moan, moan, whinge, whinge (again) about the illogical and farsical security charade flightcrew have to go through on a daily basis. But we take this carp every day like sheep - so what are we, the thousands of crew who ultimately keep this aviation industry running, going to do about it? Unless the unions are prepared to take action (direct if need be) which in turn will bring pressure on airline managements to sort out this ongoing fiasco with the faceless blunties parked at their desks in Whitehall, there will never be any change. Threaten a series of one day, national stoppages until special procedures for aircrew are negotiated - then you'll see an improvement.:D

Or, of course, as was pointed out to me the other day when I asked if I could step ahead of someone in line, politely and smilingly, "you could go and do a decent job if it pisses you off so much..."

Seriously, all sides of the argument have validity - flightcrew and other holders of secure area passes are not immune from outside influences - it is a question of a measured response for both flight/cabin crew, other staff and our customers. When that is in place, the rose coloured specs can be dusted off for another wee while.

[chandlers dad]

Blah, blah, moan, moan, whinge, whinge (again) about the illogical and farsical security charade flightcrew have to go through on a daily basis. But we take this carp every day like sheep - so what are we, the thousands of crew who ultimately keep this aviation industry running, going to do about it? Unless the unions are prepared to take action (direct if need be) which in turn will bring pressure on airline managements to sort out this ongoing fiasco with the faceless blunties parked at their desks in Whitehall, there will never be any change. Threaten a series of one day, national stoppages until special procedures for aircrew are negotiated - then you'll see an improvement.:D

Totally agree. Not that I want to waltz onto the airplane with no checks but make the flight crews have a good background check, then give them a secure badge with scanable microchip that allows them to carry what they need after going through a normal ground security check.

We have waffled in many cases, bending over backwards (not allowing a crewmember on because they had a package of Jelly Bellies is crazy) to do anything that these people demand, then are slapped in the face by security when told that your wings have "sharp points" on them and cannot be on your uniform!

Sorry but agree and feel that its time to stand up and demand that we be treated as the professionals that we are, and at the same time ask that the resources that are for the most part wasted on checking flight crew be used to concentrate on the passengers. We are not the ones blowing up the planes, its the pax and they are the ones that need to be given increased screening.

[biddedout]

If the managers in our industry actually went flying a little more often rathe than a quick two sectors before golf on Friday afternoon, more might be done to educate the men from the ministry.

[Iron Duke]

Nobody has a problem with flight and cabin crew being exposed to personal X-ray and baggage security.
However there needs to be a practical input aswell. We carry an enormous weight of responsibility for the safety and security of our passengers and aircraft, being at the very frontline of the operation. Being in direct control of the aircraft's flightpath infers that a large element of trust has already been placed on our shoulders by the state authorities, and as such I hope that in the fullness of time the regulators allow us to take with us what we feel we need to perform effectively in our place of duty.
Outside the car keys and mobile phone debate, some companies provide only minimal (and occasionally sub-standard) crew food which is very often privately supplimented by the more health conscious ... I hope that this will be allowed to continue (maybe excluding liquid refreshment).
Whilst security can never be taken too seriously, I do hope that somebody is representing the flying crew community to highlight our needs and requirements before the final policy is decided upon.

[GreatCircle]

Chandler's Dad makes a good point - the very one I made to a screener yesterday about the PAX. Ready.....I was lost for words....

"You lot think you're sooo special. Well, you're not. Remember Egyptair - up to his neck in debt, put the plane in the sea. Get used to it."

That's what made me write the report about him.....can't even blame the time of the month in his instance:mad:

[Final 3 Greens]

As a pax and a professional (member of a recognised professional body and qualified as a Dr in Italy) I do not object to being security screened in the same way as non professionals, since in the greater scheme of things, status is irrelevant when travelling by air.

I suggest that some of the "professionals" commenting in the last couple of posts would do well to develop a sense of humility and accept the rigours of the 21st century.

And by the way (for those in the UK), your government does not place you in the same social groupings as professionals, you are ranked with train drivers.

I happen to think that unfair, but please don't reinforce the stereotype.

[Carnage Matey!]

I think you just won the award for completely missing the point of the thread.

[Final 3 Greens]

Good - its nice to win awards.

[GreatCircle]

Good - its nice to win awards.

Indeed. For being sarcastic and blinkered. Congratulations. I am sure your patients will be delighted for you.

Furthermore, developing a tongue in cheek sense of humour, as portrayed by some (including me) on this board, is a form of escape from the frustration we all inevitably feel from the recent events.

Thank you for recognizing the report was unfair to our hard working colleagues on the flight-decks of the UK.

[GonzoXL5]

it does seem like the security servies are going rather overboard in a number of cases

typically in my experience poorly executed procedure is the result of a badly documented and managed procedure so I'm willing to bet that the screeners are probably just doingt he best job they feel they can do (in the vast majority of cases) with some pretty poorly defined guidance.

[I-FORD]

These last "security measures" look to me as an exercise of your government to see how far they can go in humiliating the travelling public and flight crews, in response to what the "bad guys" plan to do or threaten to do.
In this helped by the overexcited media, that fuel the terror in the general public thus growing a request for more and stricter procedures.
When will this stop?
I think that most of the public and fight crews are ready to be stripped to their knikers and to be anal probed before any trip they intend to do, instead of smashing all those nice and very expensive x-ray machines and start to enjoy their freedom of travel again.
I would let anybody board any aircraft with anything they want (baseball bats, kives, handguns).
Usually the "bad guys" are a minority, have a look at what happened to the "shoe bomber" or the one that tried to hijack the BA B747 to NBO to appreciate what the "regular passengers and crew" can do when you let them act.

[chandlers dad]

As a pax and a professional (member of a recognised professional body and qualified as a Dr in Italy) I do not object to being security screened in the same way as non professionals, since in the greater scheme of things, status is irrelevant when travelling by air.

I suggest that some of the "professionals" commenting in the last couple of posts would do well to develop a sense of humility and accept the rigours of the 21st century.

And by the way (for those in the UK), your government does not place you in the same social groupings as professionals, you are ranked with train drivers.

I happen to think that unfair, but please don't reinforce the stereotype.

Not all of us are in the UK or Italy and many of us could care less how the govt feels about our vocation. I lived and worked for many years on the Continent, both in Denmark and Germany as well as the UK. What the gent (using the term very loosely) said above is thankfully not the norm in the above countries from my experience. You are held on the same level if not above that of a doctor in these countries. Considering that I was a medivac pilot and married one of the heart transplant surgeons that I flew on a nightly basis, I have a fairly good grasp on this.

Not sure how "final" feels about this but I am a professional. Have or currently hold ATP licenses in 5 countries, engineer license as well as EMT/Paramedic rating. If they are going to start treating us as anything but a professional then its time for a new career.

Remember, its how we let them treat us in many cases and I will submit to any inspection they require at the security checkpoint but when they try to get me to fly the airplane with less equipment than needed for safe operation or fly without food and water, thats where I as PIC draw the line. Its time to start emailing our Chief Pilots and voicing our concerns IMHO.

[Loose rivets]

The horrible thing, is that nothing is new...it's just worse.

In 1970 I failed miserably in my professionalism by losing my cool with ‘security'. To quote myself... "With the crew's hands bound by some sort of subservient interpretation of professionalism." I can't put it any better, but I was always out on one limb or another, I fancied that I could see the danger. Many agreed, but had mortgages and family to feed.

On one occasion, I had just brought a flight in as captain, now all I wanted to do was sit in the back with me sports jacket on and have coffee. Ooooh no. A half mile hike so that I could go through security with the passengers. It was spelt out to me by a ‘senior captain', how my family might have been taken hostage and I would therefore be a risk. The funny thing is, that the higher the position in the airline, the more banal the statements uttered. I'll refrain from shouting, but this was in 1980.

In calmer moments, I had to accept that perhaps I was wrong. Certainly any militancy would hurt my employers and indeed their investors, so such action was a non starter, but now, things are so screwed up that action has to be taken. But what can crews do that will not compromise security?

Well, the aforementioned meetings with ‘the government', will be a start, but the unions must also make it clear that what is happening is unacceptable.

I should declare at this point that it's okay for me, I'm too old to be affected, directly anyway, but I fancy that I can still see the dangers.

Flight-deck aircrew, should be a major authority at any airfield. Their licence is probably the highest qualification document within a mile. Perhaps there is the odd PhD around in a management position, but the ATPL and ATP is a high level qualification and usually proof of a pilot's commitment to the job. As I said before, any amount of security vetting can be carried out, but once done, should become part of the licence and enable that crew member to carry out their profession without any interference from practically unqualified people.

Imagine security in a hospital, telling a surgeon what tools he could take into the theater. I am certain they would get short shrift.

If security does feel that a crew-member is a threat, then the police should be involved. A police officer has usually made his career his life, much in the way that pilots have, and hopefully this will reflect in the way crews are treated.

I think aircrew will have to go with the flow during this crisis. To make any radical changes too quickly could be dangerous. One step at a time. But the steps should start now.

[GreatCircle]

Well said Chandler. Just for the record Final, I gave up a career as a lawyer to fly, and I know of 2 MDs at Air Canada, now happily plying their new trade in 767s and A320s respectively.

Back to the thread - the issue is trust and safety - with the tools and equipment professional pilots need.

No-one is suggesting that we do not submit to regular background checking, random testing, and we should lose our jobs if we somehow cross a line into criminality that affects our trusted position...Period.

However, everyone here is correct. Where a blanket knee-jerk reaction causes this much angst with crews, and law abiding customers of our respective airlines, there needs to be a balance, a real-life workable solution rather than dictates from government agencies not thinking out of the box.

When the real-world solution for both fare-paying customers and crews is out there, this thread, will simply become history.

[chrisbl]

Apparently one of those arrested was a security officer at LHR, another an accountant and another an architect. If those types of professionals can be mixed up in this so can aircrew. In fact the type of people involved are likely to be hard working, concientious, quiet, never in any trouble and when the suggstion is made that they could be everyone says "no - not possible, he would never hurt anyone".

The boys who protest outside the Finsbury Park mosque are not the threat. The boys with police records are not the threat.

The threat comes from those holding positions of responsibility, trusted, good at what they do. You only have to look at the profiles of the 7/7 bombers to see that they were not the raving looney type.

So even aircrew are not above suspicion and whether it is liked or not they will have to put up with the hassle.

I sometimes think aircrew spend so much time above the clouds the brain is left there. Aircrew are nothing special; they are just ordinary people doing an ordinary job like everyone else. The have mortgages, divorces etc etc.

[chandlers dad]

However, everyone here is correct. Where a blanket knee-jerk reaction causes this much angst with crews, and law abiding customers of our respective airlines, there needs to be a balance, a real-life workable solution rather than dictates from government agencies not thinking out of the box.

When the real-world solution for both fare-paying customers and crews is out there, this thread, will simply become history.

Thanks and we all agree to the need for security, but when they try to treat the crew like rubbish collectors that ends for me. Have seen in the states where the flight crews go through the security checkpoint as a group, after some of the checkers "became difficult" to the crew. Possibly this is needed on a worldwide basis.

The security people forget that we are the ones inside the plane who are WORKING WITH THEM for a safe and secure flight, and as well the ones who very well might die if the plane goes down, so we want each and every flight to end in the best possible means.

Lets hope that this thread is the start of a movement to get a change in our situation. After all, when I am seated in the left seat I can do anything I want with the airplane. Is a bottle of water or sandwich really going to change this? Since solo'ing I have been flying for 34 years now and not felt the need to crash the plane yet, and this will not change anytime soon.

Fly safe!

CD

[GreatCircle]

"No-one is suggesting that we do not submit to regular background checking, random testing, and we should lose our jobs if we somehow cross a line into criminality that affects our trusted position...Period"

ChrisBL - I guess you didn't read my quote before posting your little ditty. No-one here has suggested "aircrews" are "special" in the way you say...but I do detect a bit of a chip on your shoulder coming through the net....

[RatherBeFlying]

Up to last week, people generally took their electronics, beverages and shave, grooming, makeup kit in the cabin. On the way through security, the electronics were available to checking.

So now the same items will have to be checked. Enhanced theft opportunities aside, can somebody explain to me how a liquid/gel explosive becomes safe in the hold:confused:

[GreatCircle]

The trouble is that fear causes mistrust and there's a lot of fear being whipped up at the moment.

At the end of the day, the present security approach is outdated and needs to be replaced.

Well said.

Yes, and tempers fray on here too because of frustration. (Embarrassed silence from the Great White North)

A new intelligence led security approach is the only way. I wonder if we should learn lessons from the Israeli approach to it all?

[blue up]

Sorry for the tread drift, but is it permitted (or even possible) to clear a bag through normal channels and then dump it airside in the engineers' cabin?
Would make it easier to clear security if the necessaries stay airside.

[fireflybob]

This is obviously a complex subject as this thread demonstrates.

In principle no member of flight crew objects to being subject to security checks. What is being objected to is the manner in which these checks are sometimes being conducted and the perceived lack of respect being shown to those that have the ULTIMATE responsibility for safe flight. I also sense that flight crew feel that their views are being ignored.

Some form of action with respect to these matters is long overdue. Conventionally this would be via the pilot unions or even our elected representatives! However, I think more would be achieved by taking a more lateral, enlightened approach. We need to "keep our cool" but register our strong disapproval in other visible ways. Perhaps we could all wear a suitable badge or an armband or even board the aircraft wearing nothing but our underwear (hats suitably donned of course!) - it would not take long for the press to get hold of it (no pun intended!) and we might get some welcome publicity.

Yes, these are slightly frivolous suggestions but we need to "think outside the box", in order to see any real progress!

[Vizzo]

Nice to see the headless chicken syndrome alive and well in the UK although having said that we have to be thankful that this was stopped.

Speaking with my pax hat on I think the only way to go for travel is for the passengers to board with virtually zilch.

As the parent of cc - I worry for my daughter.

However, as wannabe cc, I went for my (unsuccessful) interview the other day and was issued a security pass without producing one iota of paperwork to say why I was there or being asked to show any ID whatsoever. Tut tut.

Good point about the axes by the way. Obviously not as capable of carnage as those half-eaten Toffee Crisps - they're deadly.:}

[speedtapeking]

well i normally just sit and read and keep quiet - but time for a reply or two im afraid.

loose rivets. yes the atpl may be a high qualification. just dont forget the other major force keeping you up there - the licenced engineer. If you think you can get a JAA B1 or B2 licence any quicker than a atpl - id like to watch. It takes a hell of a lot of study to get the writtens out the way - as much if not more than the atpl's. As for experience - you can throw a monkey in a sim and teach them to fly - it takes years to make a decent engineer with experience.

blue up - engineers have offices - we dont live in dark cages any more. some oufits do - those professionally qualified engineers would like to be treated that way. maybe we should start calling you all flight deck etc.

why im moaning. you want to try and get things in and out of security to do your job. How about take EVERY single can of oil out your van and x ray them one by one. then repeat for aerosols and any other item in your van every time you go through security - see how long it takes you to get fed up tryin to do your job ! not to mention you cannot get any deliverys airside in the uk - were talking no engine oil. no nitrogen or oxygen cylinders. no water or anything else to drink. oh dont forget - we carnt go in the terminal to eat or drink - engineers are a security risk mixing with passengers.hang on - dont we go in the cabin to fix the jets?to sign the tech log ?. dont take your phone or ipod airside its a risk? as is your leatherman as you go land to airside. shame we all have 40kg tool boxes full of alll sorts of impliments that can be dangerous - but not to worry with no oil or spares allowed airside we wont need them soon. must remember that the spotty teenager taking my ipod off me will make all the difference when i have stanley knoves, hammers, scrapers scalpers not to mention some lovely 1"+ spanners - they would make a lovely hold in someones head !

the world has gone barking mad ! i just hope someone see's some sense. right back off landside to buy a drink, drink it sat at the edge of the road - then go back airside to carry on ! what a bizzare set up we now have !

[fireflybob]

speedtapeking - well said!

There is always safety in numbers so flight crew and engineers need to team up to raise objections at the highest level that our professional roles with repect to flight safety are being compromised due to "security".

[matt_hooks]

I think the idea with the liquid explosives being safe in the hold is that they were to be carried on board as component parts and then assembled on board.

The explosive on its own would be useless without some kind of detonation device, at its simplest a blasting cap or even just a piece of wire and a 9 volt battery. These things should show up on the baggage scanning equipment.

The idea is that any assembled device should be picked up by the scanners, and if the components of a device are in the hold rather than in the cabin, they cannot be assembled in situ and so the risk is removed.

As has been stated previously, it doesn't stop some loony from stuffing half a stick of dynamite and the necessary detonation equipment up their backside and walking through security.

I don't think pax would put up with full body cavity searches before all flights, and with the security measures being reactive to specific intelligence lets hope no-one plans an attack in that manner!

[flyblue]

If a loony wants to blow an aircraft, he'll find a way to do it, it's just a matter of time and he'll find a way while we run after yesterday's threats.
The only way out is preventing through intelligence, as the latest news demonstrate.

[speedtapeking]

firefly - thanks for the back up. i just carnt wait to ground an aircraft when its oxgen is low - or no N2 to blow the wheels up - or even no oil left to top the engine up !!

I will write which ever happens first as an open entry - drive back to my office an laugh my head off as the passengers kick off when ther flight is delayed. I really cannot wait for revenge of the engineer - see how long the jobs worths last then (thats not a go at the security guards i know there just carrying out orders) but how much fun to have 3 or 4 737's and a couple of 757's all sat there due no engine oil !! and yes i'd make sure the passengers got the real reason why there delayed and not just a tech delay.

bring on the end of the airside oil supplies - im going to laugh my c**k off when it happens - whilst shouting told you so !

[oneroam]

I know that this is going off the tread a little bit but I am a bit concerned about putting all my belongings in my luggage which is going to go in the hold as a close friend of mine went out with a baggage handler and he was an expert as picking at the locks and taking personnal belongings of other people! I am traveling to the UK in a few days so as you can imagine I am concerned. Is nothing safe any more?!

[rhovsquared]

My hats have to go off to the Brits for intercepting this potential atrocity if only our super-multibillion dollar beauracracy the we call 'Homeland security' :mad: could do the same detective work.. or any real work at all

it is a shame more freedoms have to be denied the majority of todays good folks just trying to travel for vacation or whatever, but that is the insane world in which we now live.

quite frankly I'm scared i think when i can financially, I will lease or buy a used Piper for my local east coast flying, though I'm allergic to mountains and large bodies of water... night is nice though, wx is very calm here usually. right now due to personal considerations I don't fly at all pax or pilot...hate it :(

[chandlers dad]

If a loony wants to blow an aircraft, he'll find a way to do it, it's just a matter of time and he'll find a way while we run after yesterday's threats.
The only way out is preventing through intelligence, as the latest news demonstrate.

Totally correct! When are the powers that be going to realize that it should be the fight crews working WITH the security people and not them against us? They seem to be "cocked and locked" trying to trip us up much of the time.

As was pointed out in an earlier post many times the people at the security have an arrogant attitude against flight crew then things go downwards from there.

[Dutchjock]

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

[Aeropig1]

There are some pretty strong views on here and I am not saying who is right or wrong but I just want to put this in the perspective from the security side.

The game has changed since our days of dealing with domestic terrorism of the 80's and security on a national and local level has to evolve and it does. Much talk of intelligence lead security and this was an example of it. The measures that were implemented were done so in a short time period and those responsible believe that those measures are comensurate to the threat. Please also remember that they are responsible for the security and safety for those on the ground underneath you. The intelligence, according to the home secretary, suggested that the attacks would consist of liquid explosive (used before against Phillipine Airlines smuggled on in contact lens cleaning solution containers) and in the absence of practical screening for this then it is sensible to prevent individuals taking fluids onto the aircraft and I am afraid that has to apply to crew. I accept the argument that you have control of the aircraft and can do what you like with it anyway but the intelligence was clearly 'liquid explosive'.

Other restrictions on crew items are already being reviewed to make things as practical as possible but this was an exceptional situation with exceptional consequences.

Instead of seeing who is the biggest cheese on the airfield and questioning evrybody elses proffessionalism should we not be trying to defeat the threat together? Crews in my experience, are proffessional crews and I would not dream of telling them how to operate an aircraft. I would not dream of telling a Dr how to operate yet it appears evryone is a security expert that knows how to do the job better.

Security can never be 100% if you want to have an industry. It has to compromise and operate in the most efficient way within that compromise. It does not always get it right but it always acts in the way it sees as best for all. I can tell you that the people who make these decisions (not me) are well aware of the effects on operations and will reduce the requirements when it is safe to do so. Remember that you base your opinions on the media interpretation and the TV 'experts' (ever wondered why they have enough time in their schedule to spend all day on the telly?) the decision makers have far more 'real time' information and yes, even more information than your union's.

The ANO speaks of the 'Priveleges' of the flying licences. To fly is not a right where as the entitlement to life is. This is a strong principle in the decision making process.

At Gatwick today nearly evrybody I saw accepted the situation for what it is and the fact that the publicity was given such a big airing, most arrived with no hand luggage allowing things to run smoother.

I can assure you that evrybody within the security side is working hard to overcome problems whilst maintaining adequate protection for all.

And for Chandlers dad - Arrogance is a two way street!

EDIT: For DutchJock:
Because the intelligence is suggesting a specific method of attack which does not include your axe. The alternative is we move from intelligence lead to total blanket all the time and the short term measures now would be the norm. Hope this helps you understand.
Have a good night:)

[microlight AV8R]

Dutchjock
Speaking as a fairly regular airline passenger I share your concern.
If we can't trust aircrew we may as well give up. I just got an email from EasyJet entitled Business as usual: It would seem that the ladies can take onboard sufficient sanitary items for the duration of the journey... Not in the box !! It seems that the terrorists have had some degree of success if that is to be the norm.

When I go flying (very small single prop) I always have a bottle of water in the aircraft. I really cannot see how flight crew can be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as Joe Public.

I like to take a magazine onboard to read. Surely that is not unreasonable?

The extreme restrictions may be justified in the short term, but it is time to calm down and re-assess the risks of various items which may be carried in hand baggage. If not, then I would contend that the freedoms Commissar Reid claims to be defending are being eroded. Some would say that has already been the case.

Edit to clarify after thread merge.

[ivor toolbox]

speedtapeking - well said!

There is always safety in numbers so flight crew and engineers need to team up to raise objections at the highest level that our professional roles with repect to flight safety are being compromised due to "security".

Indeed well said Mr Speedtapeking.

I think this subject has already been subject of many a chirp report.

How's this for a stupid situation then, where I work our cosy office is landside, aircraft airside of course, security screen in between,
and toolboxes not allowed past this point again! (Not even in van through vehicle entrance "we know where you work")

Think we should all take a day or two off citing stress and undue distraction under AWN 47

[BusyB]

Aeropig 1

I know you're speaking with the best of intentions, however,

"security on a national and local level has to evolve and it does."

How long did it take to allow crew to carry nailclippers?:ugh:

[Aeropig1]

Evryone is calm Micro, and awaiting the investigation results before making decisions - a sensible move in the circumstances

[Aeropig1]

BusyB, some airports allow them. the most unsatisfactory thing to me is that airport operators can interpret the regulations from the govt. A case of 'its my airport so my rules'. Many of us are pushing for standardisation on this front and we are getting there. The problem is that when big events happen the small things get put back. Not perfect but we are getting there

[40KTSOFFOG]

The London Underground has been a known target area for the last 5 years. Following the July 2005 bombings on the Underground there have been no mandated searches, no screening and no luggage checks. Why? Because too many people use the system and the 'powers that be' dictate that to do so would be unworkable. How can it be that security check's be appropriate for one mode of transport ,and not for another, if safety is paramount!!!!!!!!!!!
I grew up in London during the IRA London bombings inthe 70's. When off to the city for a night on the tile's, my father offered the very sageful advise of "stand behind a pillar". I still consider that a very intelligent piece of advise.
We have to accept that the world we live in is a dangerouse place, for a whole host of reasons, and I for believe that we have a choice how to live it. I am quite prepared to live with the possibility that some :mad: may be trying to kill me, but am getting very dispondant at the lenghts that others are going too, to try to keep me alive. There is such a thing as quality of life and I am getting very hacked off at the way my QUALITY (not quantity) of life is being eroded by these :mad: .

[Aeropig1]

How can it be that security check's be appropriate for one mode of transport ,and not for another, if safety is paramount!!!!!!!!!!!


Personal view but probably risk management. If a tube is bombed then the damage is confined to the tube and its occupants if a plane is blown up over a built up area the casuallty rate is potentially far higher so to manage the risk you increase the protection. I stress this is a personal view!

[rhovsquared]

don't get me wrong, such security for pax in light of this recent incident is [unfortunately] required, but as for aircrew leave them out of this THEY ARE NOT PAX...I feel if they want they should also be entitled to carry a pistol.
I feel such sec. checks on pilots IS ludicrous they are official agents of the aircarrier who hold valid licenses and identification of the airline for which they fly, such idiocy. I feel interfering with the boarding of aircrew scares passengers even further, delays flight, stresses aircrew -as if flying weren't stressful enough at times-And worst of all uses scarce sec. resources that NEED to be spent looking for REAL and Tangible threats... the aircrew is being held up by security while Osama Bin Laden is in ROW 12B:\

[Jockflyer]

Aeropig1, please tell me the logic behind not letting flight crew through security with a bottle of water and a packet of Jellybabies.
If flight crew want to kill the pax, you could put us onboard naked, and we could do it easily, so why have stupid rules about Jellybabes?


:ugh:
JF

[BusyB]

Aeropig1,

Thanks for the response but as you're no doubt aware it was the principle I was concerned with. If the aircrew side was considered at all when these precautions were planned (they can't be off the cuff) they would not be so
unnecessarily obstructive to aircrew. There is obviously no aircrew input (there is an IFALPA security team you know) and this attitude from the security branch is not acceptable. I have had several discussions with my own company's security dept due inadequate security at some airports so don't think that aircrew are unaware of security requirements, we sometimes have to consider items that you don't.

[Aeropig1]

sevral terrorists have held valid licences. Infiltration is a well known MO and aviation is as vulnerable as any other industry. There are many incidents of airline 'agents' and crew causing security incidents and some leading to mass loss of life. The reason that crew are searched to the same level as pax is that protection has to be given to all in the air and on the ground. Crew are human and as such are open to coercsion extremist views and disaffection as anybody else and to suggest that it could never happen is frankly naieve.

As for firearms, they wont helpwith a bomb. If there is a need for firearms should the crew have them or should the trained polices 'skymarshals' have them whilst the crew fly the plane?

[BusyB]

I wonder how many police and security passes go missing (lost, stolen etc) every year?:confused:

[Jockflyer]

Aeropig1, come on, answer my question.

In fact, I extend the opportunity to anyone to give me a good reason.

[Aeropig1]

Busy B, my life is spent visiting airfields and crew hotels looking at security and we take crews comments very seriously hence me sitting here trying to put a different perspective rather than watch the telly! All the security departments I deal with take crew comments very seriously and where appropriate, pressure has been applied and rules changed. Like many things when you look at something from the outside you do not see what happens on the inside. My point was that we are trying to standardise what does and does not go through the airports because that makes life easier for evryone. One other point. The European commission now has a say in what can and cant go on aircraft so it is not always HMG's doing. this is a team effort and at airline level we have to consider crew,commercial, ops, ground services and the passengers. All are vital to getting it right and if we dont we have to adjust. Government have a wider brief and things important to individuals may not be as high on the priority list as other things in their picture. Hope this explains.

JF- there is no intelligence to my knowledge of naked pilots bringing the plane down. When there is I,m sure you will be among the first to know! the mind shudders at the thought :ooh:

[Ron & Edna Johns]

The fundamental problem is that security cannot tell the difference between a real pilot who is authorised to operate a certain flight from that airport, and an imposter. They don't have time, nor does the system exist, to check that your ID is the real thing and not an elaborate forgery.

The answer lies in separating aircrew from public screening points completely. Reconcile that the people presenting are indeed the the authorised crew for flight XXyyy. Screen them and take them directly airside to their respective aircraft. Under such a system we may then carry additional items that public otherwise may not - operational items or items that support us during long TOD's. If you have to go through public screening points for any reason, unreconciled, then you should be screened to the same standard.

All this relies on management wanting to work solutions for their aircrew staff. It would be complex to do this right and will take time, resources. Unfortunately down here, down under, QF management have such contempt for its pilot staff that they frankly couldn't give a toss. Perhaps I should be a bit optimistic and give this some time to settle, but it's hard to see light at the end of the tunnel. I feel Aus is on the verge of implementing the same draconian procedures.

Yesterday for the first time in my flying career, I gave genuine thought to resigning...... :(

[Aeropig1]

In serious response JF, the principle appears to be that no fluids or gel substances that have not been controlled are being allowed through. I do not know what the intelligence basis for this is but it was not made on a whim. The substance widely being talked about is very powerful, in fact 25ml was used in the attack on the Phillipines 747 in the 90's

The gel and liquid, I would assume, were the most likely forms for the alleged explosives hance the ban. I understand that on non US flights you can now purchase food items airside and take them on the aircraft. Risk managed as the person taking it on the plane has no control over it until that point.

Hope that helps

[Jockflyer]

Thats a crap answer, and you know it. There is no justification for it. Why don't you just say its ridiculous to subject flight deck to these restrictions.

[Aeropig1]

which answer? :)

[RoyHudd]

Aeropig, give one example of a convicted or proven terrorist who has held a "valid" licence. And state which licence you are referring to. What do you mean by valid? A licence is rarely required to pass through security. It's a Security Pass.

Just ignorant waffle, I'm sad to say, like so many contributions to this thread.

[Aeropig1]

Think fedex JF - licenced flight engineer attacks colleagues with hammer with intent to fly aircraft into building.

No its not ridiculous. Evryone should be screened

[Aeropig1]

Roy, that was in response to a previous comment where the case was put for crew not to be searched on the basis that they held 'valid licences' my point is that that is not a security measure and is no justification pretty much as you said.

[RoyHudd]

Fair enough, a killer, but not a terrorist though. They seem to be of one persuasion.

But how would screening prevent a homicidal FE or FD member going ahead with the dastardly deed? Beyond issue of a Security Pass, Disclosure Scotland, etc, no prohibition of bottle openers, nail scissors, or Diet Coke is going to work. Be real.

[Aeropig1]

As I said above Roy, Security is intelligence lead and the risk has to be managed. The theory is you let what you can on board and introduce restrictions based on the information recieved as to intentions, plans etc. When it is assessed as acceptable risk they are allowed back. The alternative is consider evry possibility and ban evrything. Its not perfect and it is constantly improving - slowly sometimes i'll grant you. But there it is.

[Jockflyer]

Aeropig1,
You know which answer. You are trying to defend the indefenceable. My point is that if I want to kill the pax, then you can take anything off me that you like, as long as I'm sat up front, then your life is in my and every other pilots hands. So screening us throught the security gate is completly pointless.
Who is going to stop me if I decide I want to plow the aircraft into Parliament?
I sound like I'm wanting to play God, but it purely to illustrate a point. Screen us for illegal drugs if you want, breath test us, thats all fine, but I'm afraid taking even a leatherman off us is futile.
I would love to have this conversation with the guy(or girl) who actually makes these decisions.
Fortunately, I'm now on leave for 2 weeks, and hopefully things will be back to normal on my return.
Later.
JF

[LD Max]

The alternative is consider evry possibility and ban evrything.

Where it seems Jockflyer, BusyB and many other pilots (including myself) are having difficulty is this.

You say the security measures are intelligence led. But you are banning everything!! :rolleyes: No one has said they mind being searched, x-rayed, or sniffed!

But you ban Laptops, phones and PDAs from the flight deck or the cabin. Well that's the end of Business Class then. :D Some airlines just won't be able to operate that way.

All you needed to do was get the pax or crew to take a swig of their water, same way as you require mothers to take a swig of any baby milk. Anything else is sheer overreaction and creates unnecessary panic and concern.

...and despite the fact that infiltration is a well-known MO, why is it beyond the security services "intelligence" (or lack of it) to figure out that flight crew don't NEED to carry on a liquid explosive when they've got 6000 l of the stuff in the wings! Duh ! :ugh:

...AND Flight Crew deserve a damn sight more respect than what's evidently on offer at the moment. [EDIT] And Engineers!

[con-pilot]

A view from the other side of the tract so to speak on what Aeropig1 wrote about 'different airports, different rules'.

I am an international corporate pilot. I will not name airports or countries for the obvious reasons. In many countries we (corporate crew) have to go through the same security procedures as everyone else. However, some places we are lead to a side door and we and our passengers bypass the security area completely.

On one occasion a British Airways Captain, who I had drinks with a couple of nights before, saw us bypass the security area. I sent my crew on to the airplane and remained behind to wait for my passengers. Sure enough after the BA Captain came through security came up to me and informed me that if we should ever meet in a bar again the drinks would be on me.

So there are still different rules for different people. My former employer always carries a knife that exceeds the allowable limit for carry on. There have been many airports (outside the US, except for KBOS) when the security people will take his knife away from him. Then turn around and hand the knife to me. Then I will give him his knife back in front of the security personnel.

I tell them that it his airplane and if he wants to carry a M-16 on the plane he can do so. Well not literally, gun laws you know.

But, I think you get my drift. I am positive that all corporate aircraft that left the UK for the US in the last two days did so with anything the passengers wanted to carry on board. In other words, if you have the funds, use your own airplane.

However, when we corporate pilots are forced to fly the airlines there have been occasions when we are pulled aside and given extra security because we have airport IDs and "Airline Apparel". Then we have to show our licenses, business cards and still have to do a lot of explaining.

Hopefully sanity well return soon.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I found the answer guys and gals.......

After fifty three years in the business I finally retired.

Life is far less complex now as my big concerns are should I go sailing today or maybe work on my Cub project or just F.T.D. ( Fornicate the Dog )

Arguing with bureaucrats is abut a futile as sitting at the base of Mt. Everest and trying to convince it that it should move to another area.

Next time you guys are flying, lean over and look down at all those offices on the ground jammed with bureaucrats beavering away in their cubicules churning out more and more layers of rules.....

...you will never win because not only do they out number you they are as dense as Mt Everest.

I can't really give you guys any help, except to just look foward to retireing out of the madhouse that Aviation has evolved into. :ok: :E

Chuck E.

[Bob Mckenzie]

Ron & Edna & Aero Pig,

I'll put the question out again. If a person wearing a Police Uniform with ID (And a gun) present themselves at the Airport security screening, they are allowed through ( with the metal detectors blaring as they pass ). Why is that? How do security know that they are Police and not terrorists impersonating Police? Is it because they have a uniform and ID?

:confused:

[HighLow]

Flew to Gatwick from Dublin as a pax(Friday 8am)
the certain operator i flew with, they allowed ALL hand baggage onto the aircraft -

Flew from Gatwick to Dublin that evening with the same airline NO BAGS ALLOWED,

someone tell me that if security has been stepped up so much, explain why they are allowing aircraft to travel towards Gatwick without undergoing the same 10mile long queues and restrictions as seen in Gatwick South Terminal today.

for these maniacs, it doesnt have to be just outbound trips for them to strike...without ALL airports doing the same security checks it takes away from what the security at Gatwick are trying to achieve...

although the security staff have been working as hard as they can,
the procedures in place over the last couple of days.... i just don't see how the airport will cope....it certainly was streched beyond maximum....

and to finish off just to give an example of how good the security was in Dublin today 6.20am, waiting to check in at Departures......huge long queue......the operator decided to send an agent along the queue asking if any passengers JUST had hand baggages....what happened next i just couldnt believe...especially during these times of heightened security...he hands each of those passengers including myself a PRE-PRINTED boarding card...NOT EVEN THE PASSENGERS NAME ON IT!!! and was told to head to departures..... you think the people at departures wanted to see my passport, NO just the boarding card with NO name on it....and when boarding the plane, the cabin crew involved didn't get a look at my passport...I could have given that BOARDING CARD to ANYONE......it scares me just to think of it......


ONE AIRPORT(GATWICK) complete OVERKILL
ONE AIRPORT(DUBLIN) which operates INTO Gatwick SECURITY NOT GOOD ENOUGH....

QUESTIONS need to be asked!!


HighLow