The "Crew Security" Thread (merged)

[girtbar]

Like its not already a joke going through security all crew in EasyJet have just recieved an email detailing the new securtity rules;
The Department for transport (DFT) has directed all UK airports to introduce testing of liquids contained within the clear plastic bag carried within hand baggage. This will come into effect from Tuesday 1st May 2007.
Please be advised this testing will also apply to aircrew and airport staff. The testing will take place as the individual passes through the security search point to go airside.
It is anticipated that this introduction will cause inconvenience to customers, airport staff and crew travelling through UK airports and will potentially impact the speed of security processing.
Customers travelling from the UK Airports from 1st May onwards are being contacted by the airline to provide them with advance notice of this new requirement.
Now this really is taking the busicuit, it is a complete joke security removing youghurt pots from crew but having to test it?????
Something has to give, can we not all stand up and say enough is enough?
What are the airlines, unions doing about this? We should all refuse to go to work for one day!
I for one am sick of having to remove one shoe, both shoes, jacket one day not the next, be hounded for not having aftershave in a plastic bag, having too much liquid making up my pack lunch and then having it fingered by them.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
:{ :ugh: :mad: :eek: :\

[Skipness One Echo]

Is there anyway that the professionals can help the rest of us as well?
They are bringing the whole rule of law into disrepute when our experience of authority on a daily basis is of MORONIC over reaction.

This is having a corrosive effect on everyone's respect for people we should be depending on for our safety. When you see a white old granny being taken to one side to have her shoes X-rayed AFTER security ( Stansted Saturday morning ), and the fear in her eyes as she's led away.......

Someone has to stand up to the morons.
PLEASE. Take a day off. Everyone if you have to. There must be some unified action you chaps can take to save us all!!!
PLEASE.

[forget]

The whole 'liquid' farce has to stop. Hasn't it already been shown by experts that to put together a bomb onboard, using 'liquids', you'd need 30 professors, a lab the size of a department store - and three days to do it.

The terrorists who were jailed today must be laughing their flip-flops off. With stuff like that coming from the DFT - they've WON! :ugh:

[WHBM]

There is now such a huge bureaucracy of overpaid grey-suited ones involved in security that there are several complete Departments of Thinking Up What To Do Next. They obviously have to justify their own existence otherwise they lose their jobs.

As they still only know how to shuffle papers they then have to employ reams of "Consultants", who are of course only too happy to go along with it as otherwise they are out of the gravy train as well.

Do not think this is in any way connected with security, other than a means to milk the security budget before somebody else comes up with a way to do it.

[fireflybob]

The alternative to taking a day off in protest at these stupid edicts would be to make sure we come to work with several pots of yogurt etc - this would soon jam up the system (pun intended) and cause so much delay perhaps those in positions of authority would sit up and take some action.

[Witraz]

Yes, I'm an old cynic, but maybe this the the governments way of p*ssing everyone off as much as possible to cut the amount of people wanting to fly and so improve their 'GREEN' statistics......:mad: :ugh:

[tribekey]

You really couldn't make this nonsense up, turn up for work, have water, milk, yoghurt or any liquid confiscated, thus having airside acces only to water to drink for entire shift.
Ok, supposing there is a real threat from liquids, i could be persuaded that tight security was thus necessary. However , cars can be taken airside with their tanks full of petrol, water in washer bottles etc

Why is a member of security staff deemed capable of judging what is secure/safe and what should be confiscated? Assuming they have undergone some checks before they are let loose why can't the rest of the industry have the same 'deemed safe' status?

I could go on listing a long page of ridiculous contradictions brought about by these rules. However, the main effect seems to be to increase the levels of frustration and hence stress in the people who have to put up with them- so well done to the DFT for that, that really helps safety in the aviation industry.

[The Nr Fairy]

girtbar:

Have you got a verifiable, authoritative source for this information, other than an internal EasyJet email ?

The only reference I can find is to SAMPLE testing of liquids - see http://www.gov.gg/ccm/public-services/Press-Releases/2007/liquid-testing.en;jsessionid=E826411CC8CA048867814DBABD81C9B9 for more.

[befree]

I asume that the men it suits have not yet notice that jet fuel is a liquid.

The explosive stuff was suposed to be unstable so a trampline at the check point could speed things up.

[puff m'call]

I went through JFK as crew a couple of weeks ago and it was a breeze, didn't even have to take my shoes off!!

UK security for flight crew is just a complete joke, it's a shame it's not funny.

[GT3]

There was a notice about liquids at the staff search at LHR this morning, it talked about coming into effect on the 1st of May. I didn't read it as it was early, I didn't have liquids (and often don't as I can't be bothered with the hassle) and I was in a hurry.

More draconian measures which effect people who have had more security checks than most yet we are assumed to possibly be a risk to security :ugh:

[girtbar]

Well it took me by surprise, but the email issued through HQ states it begins 1st of May, a direct instruction from the DfT themselves. So guess its pretty official unless its only affecting certain airports?

The short notice of it all does make me wonder if the date is wrong and it should be June not May? Has nobody else received this email?

I do quite like the idea of taking lots of small pots of liquid and watching them test them all, i think that might well be the best option. I can just see the early morning rush with everybody carring containers galore, oh the look on the security guys and girls faces would be a kodak moment im sure!

:E

[J-Man]

Its a shame for airside staff as well, it gets quite costly when we have to buy drinks all day. By all means test our drinks but why should we have to constantly pay all the time.

[brakedwell]

Could this be a devious plot by green tree hugger Milliband. A lot of people will give up flying if air travel becomes too unpleasant.

[blue up]

Did anyone suggest how they are going to test liquids? Maybe I could bring in a 99cc bottle of fermented Urine if they are going to do a sniff or taste test!:E :ok:

[BEagle]

1. Bring in 100ml of finest single malt in your silly plastic bag.
2. When invited by the bottom-fondling failed wheelclamper to taste it, swig the lot.
3. Remove yourself from flying duty having been forced to drink alcohol before flying by the idiotic 'sickuriteh rools'.
4. Then go home for the day. But in a taxi.
5. Sue the ar$e off the ******* idiots for loss of flight pay, harassment and anything else you can think of.

[pilot999]

i like the idea of urine,but maybe go one further and knock it over while the lids of,:)

[blue up]

How abour a 200ml bottle of urine and a leaky cap? Unscrew it a bit more when you hand it over.


Alternatively, I wonder if anyone will decide to make a b*mb to target the security desk. Just think, leave a bottle of shampoo at the security desk that blows up an hour later, taking the security area, staff and passing crew with it. Presumably if it is not safe to go airside then it is not safe to be in the terminal.
Please, please, please tell me that they don't confiscate things that are too dangerous to go airside and then just leave them in security????? I see they display a clear box of confiscated items at LGW.

[carousel]

TGWU have intervened at stn BAA security will not be testing liquids for health and safety reasons, seems that they feel if it's not safe to take on an aircraft it's not safe for security staff to open or spray.(besides some smartalec air crew might spike with urine or some other noxious substance.)

[MaxReheat]

The lunatics aren't only in charge of the asylum - they've escaped! For heavens sake, when is somebody going to call an end to this insanity?:ugh:

[RoyHudd]

Got some beauties for testing up-coming. I wonder what form of tests these "experts" will employ...chromatography, spectrophotometry, or maybe litmus paper, sniffing, and taste-testing! I can hardly wait! Will they be testing our shoes somewhat more rigorously too, I wonder? Chemicals abound in explosive footwear and socks.

Incidentally, while having my lethal shoes x-rayed before flight yesterday, skipper too, I wondered if the hapless security people understand what havoc could be wreaked by misuse of the pilot's feet, shoes on or not? Can quickly snap off an A300 fin, or simply cause cessation of stabilised flight with a judicious shove of a foot whilst airborne.

DFT are a waste of taxpayer's money, as are their consultants and most of the sad security staff working in this new industry.:ugh:

[Captain Airclues]

Is it possible that we are playing into the hands of the terrorists? Could the liquids found in the woods and the plan to smuggle them onto an aircraft be a hoax which was deliberately leaked in Pakistan? A few months later some plastic explosive (which is much more deadly) is taken onto an aircraft while the securuty staff are paranoid about liquids.

Airclues

[BTDT]

If you're having to remove shoes, then get them to untie the laces, "sorry but I have a small back pain, unable to untie my laces" all with a smile of course. When done get them to tie the laces backup again.

:D

[Chilli Monster]

The lunatics aren't only in charge of the asylum - they've escaped! For heavens sake, when is somebody going to call an end to this insanity

The DfT / TRANSEC have such a grip on our personal freedom whilst making themselves look good you think they're going to relinquish that?

We've now had this for 9 months. You have people having to go and work in safety critical positions, on night shifts, without being able to get a drink while they're working (At least during the day you can buy drinks airside - albeit at exhorbitant airside prices).

Is this acceptable in the 21st century? NO!

It's time ALL the unions and professional associations got together and sorted this once and for all. Rather than working individually and achieving nothing maybe we should be putting the various representatives together to make a concerted effort. Maybe the threat of action, with the relevant chaos it would cause for one day to the economony, might jolt them into common sense.

As someone who's held higher security clearances than the vast majority of the contracted Security personnel, and still does, being treated like a criminal everytime I go to work is now wearing a little thin :*

[YesTAM]

Errrr, the problem is real and I believe the explosive they are looking for is nitroglycerine, as used in the Bojinka plot. I watched a documentary on TV on this last year and saw the (ghastly) devastating effect on the Japanese passenger who was unfortunate to occupy the seat above the bomb, which was assembled in the cabin out of plastic bottle of liquid explosive, detonator and an electronic watch. The only reason the plane didnt go down was because the bomber didn't use enough explosive.

I don't believe there is a simple solution to this threat nor are the authorities overreacting.

[wiccan]

I remember, [several years ago] when ATC had FULL access to the "security" cameras. We used to "Dolly Watch" non PC I know, but it was FUN.....
However, the Overall impression of so called "security".... was less than "Laughable" but slightly above "Pathetic"
Sorry to say, it has NOT changed
bb

[Chilli Monster]

I don't believe there is a simple solution to this threat nor are the authorities overreacting.

So - I can't take a drink in, making me less likely to be a terrorist, but as soon as I plug in at work I could put two aircraft together over a densely populated City and kill thousands.

And you reckon they're not overreacting? BO**OCKS!

Application of security has to be coupled with common sense - which this isn't.

[Chuffer Chadley]

YesTAM

With respect, the following solutions strike me as simple:

1) Allow only small amounts of liquid- eg 100ml at a time.
2) Don't allow any detonators in hand-luggage.

There are probably more that I haven't thought of.

CC

[Gravox]

It sounds like you guys in the UK have it rather bad.
In NZ the Aviation Security staff have to now be screened like any other crew or passenger. It was a small win for us.

Is the airline industry well unionised in the UK. Couldn't you use these security procedures as a barginning device with your airlines for meals to be provided? or atleast drinks.

The Aviation security here also enjoy having there power trip over crew and passengers alike. They seem to be the same the world over, thinking that they are personnally saving the world. :ugh:

Best of luck! Sounds like you need something to change.

[F4F]

Still don't see the point of security checking us flight crew... we don't need any weapon as we can be the weapon :eek:
Just shove the stick forward or point it someplace could do much more damage than smuggling whatever kind of detonating device, so, what is the point?

Crew harassement, what a malign pleasure that must be :rolleyes:

[Tigs2]

Why can't all the pprune members on these forums, email their respective union reps, and ask their non-prune mates to do the same with an ultimatum that unless the Authorities get a grip on the situation then all members want a strike on say 'August bank holiday' for three days. That would get the right people talking. Unless the collective decide to do something, the people involved in security (particularly the very high paid bo***x consultants) will continue to create an empire.

I don't like much about what goes on in Isreal, but what i DO like is that they don't have this s***e, according to a mate of mine there last week, they PROFILE passengers, and don't give a s**t if people think it is racist. They say it is not, it is focusing on known profiles of types of person that have been historically involved in terrorist acts/hijackings etc. And you know what it works!

This is so so crazy. They have won already.:mad: :mad: :ugh: :ugh:

[Cliqclack]

I've just realised that when I go to work my bladder contains liquid. Back off home for a p*ss

[Fly Ginger]

time to identify yourself. do you know something everyone else on this forum doesn't.................:sad:

[jdaley]

Whenever this or equivalent topics come up flight crew seem to disengage brain and drop into "we don't need any weapon as we can be the weapon" mode.

Good for you - most people know that - really.

Is it possible to state that the bod passing through security in uniform with airline id isn't someone who has 'converted' or simply someone whose uniform/creds have been 'borrowed' when resting?

(The imposter/convert doesn't have to be part of the target flight crew s/he simply has to meet an accomplice passenger after getting the 'easy' route through security.)

Bring on cavity search for flight crew?

[Two's in]

Before we all dive in, I agree that current security is simply designed to pander to the Government cretins and to "be seen to be doing something".

That said, in addition to somebody using stolen of false credentials to get airside, the use of proxy bombs or weapons being carried by individuals under duress (eg by threats to family members) is a well established and preferred terrorist technique for violating secure cordons. However unlikely, it is a threat and 100% screening is the only effective counter measure.

[beerdrinker]

This 100ml containers in a sealable transparent 1 litre plastic bag nonsense is now an "ICAO Recommedation" and is being picked up at airports world wide. OZ, Singapore and other places out east have just adopted it.
The good times have gone and the lunatics are running the asylum.

[Solar]

Blue up
I thought of that during an extremely long delay in Manchester shortly after the latest foiled attempt. I happened to mention to the chap in the extremely long queue behind me that if the terrorists had any sense they would put the bomb at the security desk as they wouldn't have to go through security and on that day the impact would certainly have been more devastating numerically wise than your average flight. He seemed somewhat alarmed but that may have had something to do with my N I accent.

[Solar]

I regularly travel through Belfast city and recently the security chap wiped my laptop with the the little paper disk that they then feed into the scanner to detect any explosive content. I made him aware that I regularly indulge in pistol shooting and that the dark stain on my forefinger was actually gunpowder residue from the day before (yes I had tried to wash it) and he said that the scanner would pick it up, nary a bleep from it. That really builds confidence.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Well, I see that up there in the UK they have just admitted that the Tube/Bus bombers were briefly under surveillance with these other fellows that have just been convicted. And that these Tube/Bus bombers were not considered a threat......! And now there have been admissions from the security agencies - the "experts" - that they will never be able to keep everyone under surveillance because THEY DON'T HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES..... :ugh:

Well...... if they had spent a little LESS time worrying about pilots removing their shoes, pulling crews' laptops out, jackets off, hats off, etc... generally harassing crews who are trying to just do their jobs, and spent a little MORE time focusing on REAL potential threats, then perhaps those guys could have been stopped. If they spend a little LESS time running around confiscating airline Captains' toothpaste and lunches and a little MORE time thoroughly examining higher risk subjects then maybe the next attack will be prevented.

Devote the resources and efforts to where the biggest threats are. Don't sweat the low risk stuff. Redeploy the man-hours you are wasting examining the Captain's can of Coke to where they will be actually worthwhile!

It is no surprise at all to hear people up there saying it's a matter of time before the next strike gets through. And it's all fundamentally because you (the UK) are not focusing your resources and efforts appropriately! You are focusing on the easy targets - the general traveling public and the operating crews. It is time to focus on the real worries (specific race/religious/cultural profiles) and aggressively deal with them!

But any chance of that happening in Britain?

Somehow, I very much doubt it........ :ugh:

[Mick Stability]

For goodness sake give them a break. Can you imagine how many pilots they have to check for toothpaste?

It's hardly surprising that the odd Islamic Terrorist slips under the radar. We have to concentrate on the major security threats to the UK.

[caracaskid]

Througout the time that increased security has been in place, items have still continued to go missing from passengers' luggage. It would therefore seem likely that if someone can steal a video camera from someones luggage, for example, as happened to a friend somewhere between the US and the UK (airside) then it would not be that difficult for the same people to get other items as required past the current security barriers.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Wanna hear something REALLY scary?

The security industry is now SERIOUSLY suggesting that aircrew will not be allowed to have their families on board the same aircraft...period...and that includes pilot's wives that may be cabin crew and are rostered together for the sake of actually getting to see one another often enough to contemplate having a relationship.

Now if they were holding your 10 year old outside the door with a knife to her/his throat you might open the door...that is the latest fear...wives might be a waste of a sharp knife however:E

I kid you not...this is coming to an airport near you....anyone think that might unite the pilot body against this security madness?

The money wasted on security that could be better spent on intelligence is just amazing.

[BOAC]

Once again, folks, 'Chirp' (http://www.chirp.co.uk/main/default.asp) are active on the crew screening issue (see latest issue) and would like your reports.

[Max Angle]

Now if they were holding your 10 year old outside the door with a knife to her/his throat you might open the door...What you need is your wife or kids sitting somewhere that the terrorist can't get at them, somewhere with an armoured and locked door that can only be opened from the inside. Can anyone think of a place like that on the aircraft?

[Re-Heat]

Wanna hear something REALLY scary?
The security industry is now SERIOUSLY suggesting that aircrew will not be allowed to have their families on board the same aircraft...period...and that includes pilot's wives that may be cabin crew and are rostered together for the sake of actually getting to see one another often enough to contemplate having a relationship.
Highly annoying, but why do you NOT think this is anything but entirely sensible??

[spud]

Because we're adults

[captjns]

Hey wait theres more.... Body Cavity Searches starting at the end of the year... pardon the pun

[Superpilot]

Let the dft know what you think about their idiotic practices.

Pick an email address: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/aviation/emailcontacts

It's not hard............ (just a little brave)

[RatherBeFlying]

Back in my mid-teens, I was thoroughly read up on the encyclopedia articles on nitroglycerine and other things that go bang.

The early railroad cuttings were blasted with nitro. The major problem was transport of the stuff as it has a tendency to go boom at the slightest shock. Nitro carriers were required to display a signal flag so that other workers could give them a wide berth.

Later practice was to mix the stuff on the spot, sometimes even in the blasting hole.

Mixing the stuff together requires transport of nitric acid -- quite nasty stuff that I would not want on my person as well as temperature control -- security and cabin crew are advised to be extremely vigilant for ice buckets and cooler packs:eek:

Nitro is today available by prescription in small capsules for heart patients, but I have not heard of any such patients suddenly vaporising:\

But who knows what could happen when you get a few score rickety HPs extracting the nitro from their little capsules to get enough together for a big bang:uhoh:

[firemac]

I went through security at a certain UK airport last Thursday forgetting completely that I had a toilet bag with aftershave, toothpaste, mouthwash, etc. in my overnight bag (hand baggage). Normally I have checked baggage which contains the toiletries but, as this was only a one-nighter, I only had one cabin-sized bag. So no clear plastic bag routine: overnight bag through the scanner & not a word from the security bods about the liquids.
Amazingly enough, I similarly overlooked the toiletries when passing through the scanners at the European airport on the way back and, guess what? Not a peep from the scanners nor any word from the staff.
Now, what therefore is the point of all this liquids in clear plastic bags b0ll0x? If I had been a terrorist chappie.....?? Doesn't exactly fill one with confidence, does it? :confused:

[Chilli Monster]

Maybe if we all filled up the mailbox at [email protected] they might get the message ;)

[Superpilot]

Maybe if we all filled up the mailbox at they might get the message

Exactly!

This is the exact method lobby and pressure groups use to show their disgust at something. Please realise that this is one of the best methods to get your voices heard these days.

It will take between 3-5 minutes to write an experience or view and press the send button....do it!

[BEagle]

Although I no longer fly multi-crew aircraft, as a passenger it concerns me greatly that the stress of heavy-handed and frankly absurd 'security' screening conducted on law-abiding aircrew by some lowest of the food chain bottom-fondling idiot will lead to distraction and, ultimately, to a serious incident or accident.

I was horrified to read those accounts in CHIRP which thudded onto my doormat today.

The DfT are responsible for this nonsense; you can complain to them at http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/complaints . I hope you all will!

[boyband]

I think nitroglycerine that was mentioned earlier couldn't possibly get as far a security check without going off. If you remember Bo and Luke Duke always had to be mega careful when lifting it from the trunk of their Dodge Charger, prior to blowing it up with the help of their cross-bow and sticks of dynamite.:}

[Wefeedumall]

As someone who has to endure security several times during my 12 hour shift I can sympathise with flt crews, especially when they take my 250ml bottle of water from me and yet the vehicle I am driving could have over 800 of the same sealed in the back to be put on an a/c!
Just a thought but could someone not start a petition on the government website similar to the one that got so much media attention to do with road pricing and then let us all know through this site when it is ready so we could all add our voices.
As I say, the road pricing petition made the main TV news plus all the daily papers. It just need's someone to start it off and I am afraid I am not up to the task but I am sure one of our more educated pilots could do it in a few minutes.
Maybe it will be the voice we all need?:ugh:

[girtbar]

Just typed up one now, and it will take a day to be approved. Once it has i will post the link and i hope we can perhaps make some ripples in the waters that be?

Have just had a little bit of a "D'oh" moment however.

After spell checking the main body of text i have forgotten to spell check the heading :ooh:

So instead of asking to realax the current rules on air side pass holders carrying liquids i've spelt carring.

Been a long day in my defence! :sad:

[Alpine Flyer]

I just read news that the EU Parliament might take a stand against a prolongation of the liquids rule. They reason that there is no evidence that the liquid ban/screening has prevented any act of terrorism and that the cost (apparently for disposal of all the liquids surrendered at checkpoints) is too high.
The same news said that it's mainly the UK government that opposes less stringent rules and the MEP interviewed suggested that the UK make their own rules if they feel like it but let the rest of Europe revert to sensible security checks.

(Even now the UK apparently does not excercise the option that allows a little less stringent screening of crews.)

[RossEA]

If the UK are so fixed on dealing with passengers and liquids at security, who screens and checks liquids that get transported to air-side that we all buy once we've got through security? Whats stopping terrorists plotting to get a batch of "water" through this way and purchasing their own stuff once they've been through security?

[radeng]

Last week, they took great delight at FRA in confiscating a spanner from me. A double ended 2 and 4BA spanner - 3 inches long, 5/32 thick, 3/8 inch wide, with no sharp edges. Obviously there was a danger that I would take the aeroplane apart with it....I'm not sure who the dafter ones are - the goons implementing the searches or the fools who mandate them.
Left me with the all metal Parker ball point pen thugh,. which you could stab someone with - well, just..

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

Flew back via Arabia this weekend just passed from a small island country in the Indian Ocean. Plastic bottles of water, which had been frozen to prolong cool refreshement were confiscated, on the basis that what had been water would revert to same liquid form in turgid heat of airport.
A large party of young Russian men following through security were each allowed to take a full size umbrella on board. One presumes that, because the umbrellas had been handed out by the primary political party as election gimmicks during the run up to such an event, they were state approved?
The Russians youths, by the way, behaved with boisterous impeccability and drew attention to themselves only by favourable comparison with the almost certain behaviour of a similar group of young male weightlifter types, had they been British, English or whatever dear Gordon the Scot would call the ersazt population of that northern isle.:ugh:

[TFlyguy]

Assuming I'm a "naughty" person and wish to take my "dangerous" liquid through security .........

Anyone able to tell me how putting it in a resealable clear plastic bag makes it any safer???????

[Superpilot]

Well done Girtbar, I suggest a new thread when it's done.

My funniest experience trying to carry a small bottle of liquid past security (as pax) was when I took a small spray bottle containing a hair oil. The muppet looked at it and remarked:

"This is not possible!"

I said: "It's been through before", to which he replied without thinking (cos that's not what they're paid to do):

"This is possible" :ugh:

[lotman1000]

The following is the text of a letter sent to the UK Times newspaper late yesterday, not by me; perhaps it will be used, perhaps not.



Sir,

There is a new, insidious threat to air travellers’ safety.

For most passengers,security screening is a terrible nuisance, but not a major problem. The majority only endure it a few times a year. But aircrew are subjected to exactly the same process every time they go to work. Many experience it three or four times in a single day.

According to many confidential incident reports, at many UK airports the security staff, often quite low-grade, are increasingly aggressive, hostile and rude to aircrew, and “delight” in carrying out frequent full body searches, emptying bags, and generally making life difficult. Aircrew now reach their aircraft seething with contained anger. This is dangerous enough, but the time the crew needs to settle down, and to check the aircraft and paperwork, including essential navigation notices, is also being badly eroded. It is important to understand that these reports analyse the errors that have already happened as a result of all this, and are not simply about the security staff and procedures which they describe and cite as a contributory cause.

It is an absurd regulation that requires an operating crew to be searched aggressively for the weapons needed to take control of an aircraft by foul means, when they are going to take control of it in any case five minutes later because that’s their job. The assertion that “everyone must be treated the same” is as ridiculous in its earnest stupidity as it always is, but is the only explanation advanced so far. There are many ways that the problem could be overcome without reducing aviation security standards, about which I have great experience and knowledge, by one jot.

The Civil Aviation Authority, and the Department of Transport, should not be allowed to continue down the traditional Civil Service route of masterly inaction until an accident happens and people are killed by the aviation security regulations rather than saved by them.

[girtbar]

Well the petition is still not live, but ill check again later this evening.

[swordfling]

cavortingcheetah's post made be think - are there any rules on frozen liquids?

I really do not know how those of you who have to work with this nonsense cope. :mad:

[snuble]

My two cents:

There will be an ease of the liquid rules when they are going through that 6 months review, simply because of the massive drop in tax free liquor sales. The whole plan was to get the sales up, but it failed. People don't know what is allowed and what is not, and don't bother to take the chance of losing their booze.

[Flying Spaniard]

I heard a story a while ago where some Pakistanis desperate to come to the new motherland jumped the fence at Islamabad to climb up the landing gear bay as a B777 was getting ready for T/O.

If people that are stupid enough to think that they will survive an embarkment like this one, what is stoping Mr/Mrs terrorist to do the same thing but instead plant a magnetic explosive to the fuselage of the aircraft? :ugh:

The best thing of all Mr/Mrs terrorist will not even have to die do get the message accross.

All these morons who invent these rules should be send to the gulags indefinately.

[Two's in]

Interesting observation from Sir Michael Bishop (BMI) that there may indeed be a mathematical relationship between the number of security staff on duty at any one time, and the amount of time pax are asked to be at the airport (ie. shopping in a revenue rich environment) to clear the unacceptable security lines. Thank goodness BAA shopping and security staff rostering are completely decoupled activities.

More here;

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article1739175.ece

[WHBM]

Thank goodness BAA shopping and security staff rostering are completely decoupled activities.
Indeed they must be.

Security. Constant staff shortages, the ones who are there are often plonkers, complete jobsworth attitude, never any managers apparent, half or more the security stations usually closed, etc. Problems invariably blamed on the time it takes to get security clearance for staff.

Airside retail. Never any staff shortages, staff always pleasant and polite, no jobsworth attitudes, adequate number of managers on hand, shops never closed due to staff shortage. Seemingly no problem in getting security clearance for staff (which, as they are airside, is the same as for their security counterparts)

[Julian Hensey]

Well well PPRUNE gets mentioned in The Times no less about this.....

http://travel.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/travel/business/article1738277.ece

[lotman1000]

Security No liquids over a tiny volume, must be in container in stupid plastic bags if under that volume. ( How does that bag make a container safe when it is unsafe it not in the bag?)

Airside retail Any volume of liquids packed in any size of bottle, crated and taken airside via a cursory check by the same bottom-feeders who man the human security channels, no thorough check on contents (any check at all?) and then sold to compulsorily liquid-less passengers, aircrew and ground staff at extortionate prices.

Passengers and crew can then take these large, more or less unchecked containers on to the aircraft, as many as they can stagger on board with. So can all airside ground-staff with a reason for going into the cabin, ie cleaners, dispatchers, station staff etc etc.

All in the name of windfall profits for retailer's and airport owner's shareholders? How cosy, and how ineffective against terrorists.

[facsimile]

At last a use for all those shampoos and gels we've been nicking from the hotel for years, I would think at least 4 in the flight bag each and every time we go through security would get the message accross. Should always carry them in case of unscheduled night stop!!!!

[carousel]

I am sure that there are security people who would be only to happy delay both you and the rest of the crew while they turn your bag inside out looking for your tricky substance's (providing of course a. they see them b. that they can be bothered to join in the fun):D

[timelapse]

which, as they are airside, is the same as for their security counterparts

The criminal record check is the same, but there's a CTC check as well by Police / SO15 / MI5 for security staff which takes far longer

[ComJam]

A friend of mine recently had a small bottle of liquid (shower gel or similar) confiscated by one of these anti-aircrew agents. When he asked why he wasn't allowed t take it through he was told:

"You can't take anything through that might enable you to take over the aircraft."

His reply: "I intend to take over the aircraft, i'm the ***king Captain" :D

The whole thing is beyond a joke now, there seems to be no consistency in the checks i go through every day. Virtually stripping the fillings out of my teeth to ensure i have no metal on my person, doesn't set the machine off one day but does the next! Sometimes it's shoes off, sometimes it isn't. Sometimes the security guy's are overbearing, jumped up, Hitler-style muppets and ............sometimes they're worse. :ugh:

[clearfinalsno1]

Guys we are not alone in knowing this is absurd. Watch and enjoy these 30 second videos:

Airport security 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkmlj8h6U7M)
Airport security 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aYgv-wn88s)

We need to start writing to our MPs. This is not politics, it's just nonsense.

Moderators, PLEASE can we have our own Airport Security forum on PPruNe.

[J-Man]

Its gone on for long enough now, time these rules were relaxed.

[MaxReheat]

First clip - that's the message the DfT are refusing to accept.
Second clip - hilarious and just about sums up the warped thinking behind the current regulations.:D

[creamegg]

When I went through security at chrismas time at Manchester I had 3 medicine liquids with me which I put in the small plastic bag but was surprised as no-one wanted to check what they were and the doctors letter I had with me wasn't asked for either.

But on the other hand there were people going around saying that we had to declare our lippy and mascara etc otherwise that would be taken of us!

:rolleyes: :ugh: :rolleyes:

[Superpilot]

Security measures such as these are not designed to withstand scrutiny by sane, professional people (who can rip the logic behind them apart). They exist solely to make it appear to the general foolhardy public that the government is doing something about the threat and is only reacting to a definite (debatable) threat.

Airport Security Game: http://www.shockwave.com/gamelanding/airportsecurity.jsp#

[cargo boy]

And this one; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykzqFz_nHZE&mode=related&search= applies to both sides of the Atlantic.

If I may relate a personal experience from a few weeks ago as I was passing through the bowels of Manchester Airport where flight crew have to go to be screened separately from the 'Mall Shoppers' upstairs. I was with my crew, all 18 of us plus our escort who had an ID that actually worked the various doors we had to traverse through to get back up the the departure gate.

Those crew who had various personal items in their little baggies were dutifully showing them to the screeners when I noticed on the far side of the checkpoint, a worker came into the area with one of those tall wire trolleys used to transport goods from the delivery vans to the retailers stock rooms. In the trolley were several bundles of 1 litre bottles of drinking water. Each bundle had about a dozen bottles shrink wrapped in clear plastic together.

The worker then had to put each bundle of shrink-wrapped water through the X-ray machine!!!! :rolleyes: The bottles were clear as was the wrapping. There was only clear liquid, most probaby water, in the bundles.

What was so obvious to us was that the 'security' monkeys, (I use the word 'security' advisedly and apologise to monkeys for insulting their intelligence and discretionary thinking) could just have looked at the bundles and seen that there were no sharp or solid objects hidden within the bottles but they had to go through the motions of x-raying them anyway. What was also glaringly obvious was that no attempt was made to check that the contents of the bottles was indeed water as that would have meant that they were rendered unsaleable.

So, as we crew were having our aftershave and lip-gel inspected to make sure we didn't have more than the prescribed 100ml, a worker was bringing through at leat 120 litres of clear liquid to be left airside, unchecked except for sharp pointy things inside!

Now they want to introduce random sampling of the liquids! It really is the asylum being taken over by the patients. It smacks of Ministry Muppets thinking up new ways to justify their existence. It has absolutely nothing to do with security.

Why, after the underground bombings, is there still no system of security measures in place other than public vigilance? I don't see bombs and terrorist acts being repeated on the trains every other day. The same applies to airport security. The way it is implemented is nothing but a sham and designed to fool the gullible public that something is actually being done.

Bring in proper profiling and use intelligence to filter out those people most likely to carry out acts of violence on an aircraft... those whose intent is to carry out an act of terrorism and not the 99.99999% of the rest of us who are not a threat. Someone with the intent on causing mayhem and disaster is not going to get past a properly trained profiler when they know that they are likely to meet their maker or vestal virgins once they get successfully airborne.

[rubik101]

At our security check area this morning there were five 'guards' on duty.
No.1 stood outside the entrance smoking, hopefully just a cigarette.
No.2 sat at the desk and inspected my 'Landside Only' ID card.
No.3 sat watching my bag and jacket as it passed through the X-ray machine.
No.4 and 5 were eating a heated meal. Next to them both sat a 330ml bottle of orange juice and a 330ml bottle of fruit crush drink, both with plastic obscuring wrapping.
Did I say anything?
Not on your life!
Are these muppets really given a more thourough screening than us?
Do these muppets pass through security on the way to work? If not, why not.
How come they can sit airside with their meals and drinks and I am only allowed an empty water bottle?
Thank God I fly short-haul.
Write to your MP. Make a noise for goodness sake!
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

[girtbar]

Well still no word from the 10 Downing street website to say nay or yay to the petition. Im wondering if they are worried by the amount of people who might sign it?

Once its approved and up and running i'll post the link....if thats allowed?

[lotman1000]

See The Times (UK) today, Letters.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/debate/letters/article1744252.ece

[FedUpPax]

Another youtube classic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LBAmLEG1bM&NR=1

[Wiggly Bob]

At the bottom of the page from the link above

"A senior Lufthansa pilot pointed out the idiocy to me - he is not allowed to carry e.g. nail clippers, a problem on long-haul flights where he may be away from home for up to a week at a time.
Yet right behind his pilot's seat is a three-foot-six fire axe. Joined-up thinking?"



Rob

[islandhopper]

The notice on entry to the security zone says something on the lines that security staff have the right to work without being verbally or physically abused - so what gives them the right to do it to us.
UK security sucks - for gods sake even the Tsa are professional and polite and that costs nothing wake up Transec before you put us all out of a job.:mad:

[X-Centric]

A great thread, normally there are many opposing views but this one is virtually unanimous in opinion. I regularly fly from LHR as a passenger & it's become a total nightmare. Lines of people stretching through the entire terminal & up to the carpark at T3 waiting to clear 'security' being harrassed & shouted at by these morons is just beyond belief. Then notices that, "passengers only," may enter T4 so if you're going away from home for a long time no sweet goodbyes from your loved ones anymore! The BAA may be looking forward to the grand opening of T5 but if this crap keeps on for just a little while longer LHR will be a ghost airport: people are already starting to avoid the place like the plague. I know: I work with many nationalities who are now flatly refusing to use LHR because of the moronic security staff & there Draconian measures.

When I travel into Europe I will always opt for the ferry. Guess what? No brainless security, no a$$hole making a worker's or a traveller's day a misery. But guess what else? No terrorist action carried out on the ship. How come? You could drive a car or van packed with explosives of any description & obliterate the ship, but they don't, God forbid they ever do, but it's certainly not the lack of security that is putting these bastards off.

As a previous poster has said, I have walked through security with all of my liquids in my hand luggage by mistake: shampoo, shower gel, after shave, toothpaste etc., & the scanner never picked it up. Are we therefore relying on the budding terrorist to be honest & admit that he has his nitro in his hand luggage & then dutyfully put it into a clear palstic bag?

We have a real flight safety issue developing here & it's about time that this nanny state inducing, overly p.c. Government in the UK started to really tackle the problem not produce putrid sound bites that do no good for anyone. If they don't then they'll be tolling the bell as the UK civil avaition industry goes down the pan.

[SLFguy]

X-Centric

Sorry but for Pax the measures are a fact of life and may serve some purpose. For aircrew however a solution needs to be found as suggested in the link above.

[lexxity]

Once again I must complain about the idiotic security at Manchester. Last Friday myself, Husband and 18month old flew to LHR. My Son's change bag was scanned. "There are liquid items in it" I was told. There obviously wasn't. So it went through again. "Yes there are, they are long, thin and at this end of the bag." Ahh, wet wipes! So I asked could this be what was being shown on the screen? No I was told and promptly had most of the contents removed from the bag. Except for the wipes. Once again the bag is xrayed and look, there is still something wet and long in there.

Once again I am ranted at about liquids, once again I explain that it will be the wet wipes. So I take them out and the bag is screened. Again.

TA DA! The mysterious long, thin, wet thing is gone!

Yesterday, whilst on duty, after being scanned and patted down I was asked if I minded my handbag being randomly searched? As this has happened just about everytime I have passed through for the last two weeks, I replied "yes, actually, I did." I also asked how this was catching any "terrorists". The answer? We don't make the rules.

I absolutely fail to see how any of this is helping. The DfT are fools and are making more and more people, who love their jobs, deeply unhappy and stressed for no good reason.

T then asked about testing of liquids. Apparantely they are to test every 10oth liquid for now and in the future it will be every 50th!! Yes they do actully stick litmus paper into tubes of toothpaste.:ugh:

[Chuffer Chadley]

Quote:

Sorry but for Pax the measures are a fact of life and may serve some purpose. For aircrew however a solution needs to be found as suggested in the link above.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree.

Security is surly and off-putting for the paying punters (who, as we need no reminding, we rely on for our wages), as well as us. Pax can see as well as we can that the rules are arbitrary and unnecessarily brusquely enforced.

I hate the thought of my punters being upset for no good reason before flying.

CC

[BEagle]

"I hate the thought of my punters being upset for no good reason before flying"

Chuffer - it is very kind of you to have such consideration. But, as ex-aircrew-now-frequent flier, I am far more concerned that YOU and your colleagues should not be upset for any good reason before flight.

The arrogance of these bottom-fondling failed wheelclampers and toothpaste checkers is frankly absurd. Time that the whole $odding lot of them were booted back to the dole queues whence they crawled.....

As for the anally-retentve DfT - just what planet are they from?

Regarding standards of security:

UK - sometimes shoes and belt. Always long queues.
FRA - sometimes shoes, sometimes belt, sometimes watch. Presumably these peoples' ancestors collected gold teeth?

Other German airports are far more friendly and sensible than the cretins at FRA; I now try to avoid the place unless there's no feasible option.

[llondel]

The terminally clueless sub-species of SLF doesn't help matters either. I picked the wrong security queue yesterday because someone about three in front of me hadn't done the business with the liquids and the plastic bag and so held up the queue while the offending items were sorted. Then the one in front of me, who'd just stood there for a few minutes and watched all this taking place, did exactly the same thing. I like to think that had that been me, I would have successfully put two and two together and achieved four, and been sorting my carry-on before reaching the front of the queue.

[niknak]

The most striking thing about the vast majority of posts here, all posted by the oh so knowlegable "experts":rolleyes: , is that none of you have produced a solution to the problem of preventing terrorism incidents.

The one thing I can guarantee is that, without exception, you'd all be squealing like stuck pigs and running to your ambulance chasing lawyers if the rules were relaxed and your flight was caught up in any type of incident.:rolleyes: :ugh:

[Human Factor]

The most striking thing about the vast majority of posts here, all posted by the oh so knowlegable "experts" , is that none of you have produced a solution to the problem of preventing terrorism incidents.

Profiling.

[MaxReheat]

Niknak - do you work for the DfT because just like them, you just don't get it, do you? My day would indeed be ruined due to an act of terrorism on my aircraft but it ain't going to be or my crew 'terrorising' and it isn't going to be due to my having taken a 150 ml can of aftershave on board, either.:ugh:

[Married a Canadian]

Profiling is the best option

Unfortunately it upsets the PC brigade... Sigh!

[kontrolor]

it's not only you pilots who get the pounding...controllers on one of our aiports are not allowed any more to come to twr via rotating doors any more (please note that to enter those doors one needs valid magnetic card and to enter next doors card is needed as well, and there IS a video camera installed on both doors). No, now they must pass the security gate, where they are put to daily SS treatment, regardless that a) all the security know all the controllers b) for an atco to make an act of terrorism...well its the same as with pilots (you either trust them or you shoot them on site).

I think this treatment of us, professionals is showing, that there is no trust whatsoever towards us, and that semi-literate SS individual on security passage has power to humiliate you and us every day.

[AlexL]

The most striking thing about the vast majority of posts here, all posted by the oh so knowlegable "experts" , is that none of you have produced a solution to the problem of preventing terrorism incidents.
Neither has the DfT. We have yet to see any court case demonstrating that this liquid bombing incident actually existed. Anyone with any knowledge of chemistry will tell you that its not easy to do, and this is a huge over reaction. (gleefully accepted by BAA as they can nick everyones liquids and sell them back to them for 4 times the cost airside).
Security is not absolute, the only way to prevent an incident is not to fly. otherwise there is always a risk. Most people think that the security restrictions on the pax are Over the top. (especially given that we regularly pick up pax overseas with little or no screening, who can bring what they want onto the a/c).
Everyone accepts that to apply the same screening to the aircrew is just moronic. I don't need liquids, I don't need a toothpick, I'm already in control of the aircraft.
To commit a terrorist act you need means and motivation. Lets concentrate on screening people for the motivation.
Also I agree with the previous poster that I would prefer my pax not to be annoyed when they get on the plane. Air rage incidences are on the increase, I wonder why? :*

[Flying Spaniard]

AlexL,
There may not have been a court case but there has been a case where a terrorist blew a large hole on a 747:

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

Why do we need a court case to proof this?

The facts are simple, where there is a will there is a way, as long as there are conflicts between nations, ethnic groups and religion groups we will see acts of violence against each other there is no way of stoping this, we should concentrate on creating a more peaceful planet (i know this is wishful thinking) i accept there is always going to be a conflict between people but by reducing the conflicts the less violence we shall see therefore less need of security measures which are often handicapped and cause more problems with it.

The world's problems are escalating and all we seem to be doing is patch fix them but in the meantime more conflicts happen and the people in turn get more frustrated and scared there is only so much we can take, the path we seem to be on now is the path to WWIII.

[old,not bold]

The notice on entry to the security zone says something on the lines that security staff have the right to work without being verbally or physically abusedRemarkable how this notice is only displayed by railway and airport companies who realise that their appalling treatment of customers and rotten service standards, together with their employees' attitudes and behaviour, are likely to provoke uncontained, murderous rage in a nun, let alone in the average person.

The notice really means:

Having paid an exhorbitant sum for the service you expect from us, you are now going to be delayed, harassed and shoved around by a bunch of cretins obeying our incompetent and invisible management's directives to the letter, which have been read very slowly to them because they have between them the IQ of a bar of soap.

If you react in any way other than subservient acquiescence to this appalling treatment, the cretins have been told to accuse you of being disruptive and summon the police to arrest you. DO NOT ARGUE OR RESIST.

[JOSHUA]

The focus should be on sensible profiling of anyone who's operating crew on any commercial aircraft, be it flight deck or cabin crew - we are the people who have open access to the flight deck and no amount of security checking just prior to a flight is going to reduce the risk of a 'sleeper' having that access to the flight deck - hence the overriding importance of thorough profiling!

[Max Angle]

Very funny, just a shame that it's also 100% correct.

[WHBM]

ClearfinalsNo1:

Don't be concerned.

1. The time to look at the screen is doubtless taking longer because the IT systems are running slower and slower as time passes.

2. In the "good old days" we wish to return you always got stamps in your passport each time in/out, and the officer could see a complete record of where you had been. Nobody got worried then.

[brain fade]

The amount of 'security' that pax should be subjected to will plainly fluctuate as does the 'threat level.

For aircrew, however, the sole purpose of contact with 'security' is to give the crew member whose family are being held hostage, a chance to express their concerns unobtrusively to someone who is in a position to help.

I can see no other reason to detain aircrew, who will soon have total control of the aircraft and all the pax anyway.

[AlexL]

For aircrew, however, the sole purpose of contact with 'security' is to give the crew member whose family are being held hostage, a chance to express their concerns unobtrusively to someone who is in a position to help.

What complete ballcocks.
firstly these minimum wage muppets in 'security' are in no postion to 'help' if anything real actually happened. For that you need the police, specifically the anti-terrorist mob or special branch.
Secondly this thin excuse is often wheeled out to justify the treatment that aircrew get. even the terrorist planners know that kidnapping a pilots family is a non starter. These are not rational 'sensible' bank robbers, these are murderous fanatical people, and cannot be trusted to keep their word.
Plus coercing someone to kill 200 people is a tad different to coercing them to steal a couple of million quid of their employers dosh that is insured and traceable anyway.
Anyway If that ever happened to me (i don't consider it even a slim threat, as I KNOW it will never happen) I would phone the police the minute I was out the front door.
next stupid excuse for this treatment?
anyone?

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Thread drift..... years ago (20+ years ago) my father found himself consistently receiving more attention from customs/immigration when flying into Aus. Went on for a number of flights until he finally inquired as to what the bl@@dy hell was going on.

Transpired he'd SAT NEXT to a suspect of some sort on an earlier flight! So he'd been tagged for scrutiny until they were satisfied he was clean and not associated with the other chap. :uhoh: :ooh:

So who knows what they have on you these days. Better declare that excess booze, eh?

Oh and brain fade - your username is unfortunately apt. That simply isn't the reason crew are forced through security. If it was actually the reason I think they would have told us by now. Clearly you are not a pilot...

[GT3]

Good one today at LHR. Staff search has a sign up saying random shoe search. But the guy at the scanner gets very ar5ey when everyone is not taking their shoes off. He then shouts at someone "the sign says everyone should take off shoes" to which a few of us tell him it doesn't. Does the sign get changed? Does it hell! So I started my day a little annoyed that someone had shown me a bit of attitude for following what their sign said which was not what they wanted me to do??????

[Capt. Queeg]

For aircrew however a solution needs to be found as suggested in the link above.

Easy.

Just freeze all your liquids and gels before you come to work. They are now no longer liquids.

Keep 'em in one of those cooler-bags.

Good luck.... tell us how it went! :ok:

[stellair]

This nonsense has to stop.............

Passengers....yes, fine screen and security check them all you like but crew....No

In order to get an airside pass we have criminal background checks and all the correct ID and documentation. I have heard of no security threat that involves a pilot or crew.

I work for a cargo airline, 2 pilots on board, me and my captain, that's it. We have spent 12 hr nights before now with no drinking water on board, catering is not always available at freight aprons. This is absolutely unacceptable.

It is a violation of human rights if nothing else!

A one day strike for some point in the next six months is the only answer to make the DofT listen, I have written 2 letters and made 3 phone calls to no avail, the respone is always 'they are the rules, you must abide by them'. I'm all for the safest possible operations but common sense has flown out the window here.

ONE DAY INDUSTRY WIDE AIRCREW STRIKE.......maybe a pprune thread, all sign if in favour? :ugh:

[brain fade]

Alex
I'm not defending 'security'.

Rather simply pointing out a simple truth.

"Always stop legitimate peeps entering a secure area, so that if they are a proxy bomb victim they can unobtrusively speak out"

Is that hard to follow?

Ron and edna

In a previous life I was in the (British) Army. We stopped EVERYONE so that if they were a proxy they could at least state the fact.

Several guys got a gong for driving said vehs away.

Take my point?

ps 7500 mostly jet. Flying since I was 15

[RatherBeFlying]

stellair,

Flying 12 hours without adequate hydration is
unsafe
unhealthy
Many jurisdictions allow workers to refuse an unsafe work situation until the safety concern is rectified.

So either you fly 3 hour legs or you take on board sufficient fluids to maintain adequate hydration which is required to sustain mental alertness.

[Dan Winterland]

Does any one else remember the Viz cartoon strip, 'The Bottom Inspectors'. I'm reminded of it right now!

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Oh brain fade,

The reason all crew go through security is because "they" are terrified that terrorists are going to grab some uniforms and mascarade as pilots. That's because there is no universal identification system, and currently no way to check the 'pilot' presenting is, in fact, bona fide. So rather than implement such a system the easiest way is just screen all pilots. Many of us have been arguing for years that there should be such a universal system to confirm this to be a legitimate pilot and the authorised pilot of flight XYZ.

And if a Capt's wife and kids really are being held hostage whilst Capt tries taking something through, WHY do you think he's more likely to "express his concerns" to security goons vs making a mobile phone call to the cops? If he hasn't made such a phone call then he's hardly likely to 'fess up to security - he'll probably just stay silent and hope to get through!

But mate, this is a tired, tired old conspiracy theory - usually dreamed up by clones in dark rooms who, frankly, seem to be 50% ex-military types who've lived in a different world! It is so improbable! This is not how these guys work - there is too big a risk of being foiled. Far more likely scenarios are exactly what those fellows in England are going to jail for, and the 7/7 chaps. CAN YOU NOT SEE THIS?

We are wasting untold manhours confiscating Captains' nail clippers, shaving cream and bottles or water when the resources should be focused elsewhere. In Australia airside workers (engineers, caterers, cleaners, etc) are still, yes STILL, going airside with just a cursory look at by security. They don't confiscate their water or any other liquids or even their weapons - because they are not metal screened! They go in the side gates still and it's "too expensive" to set up proper screening points at each gate.... Well, these people are arguably just as susceptible to your hostage conspiracy. So why isn't being addressed there?

So brain fade, where do you see the biggest threat? A freighter Captain wanting to take a bottle of water on a 12 hr flight? An airside worker going to play with an aircraft unscreened? Or perhaps some disgruntled radical youths building a fertiliser bomb and driving a van - unscreened - into a shopping centre carpark?

Where's the biggest threat, mate?!

My argument as presented here is disjointed and circular, because frankly, I'm too frustrated with insane attitudes like yours to spend anymore time re-writing it! Virtually all professional pilots agree with me and have had a gutful of insulting, ineffectual "security" measures being imposed on us. Not one single pilot has been caught. Meanwhile our side gates, our shopping centres, our train stations, our beaches, our main streets continue to be wide open because of narrow minded thinking, such as yours.

You're welcome to the last word, mate, because frankly you are not the bloke I need be arguing with to change things!

[tribekey]

brain fade
assuming the idea of 'proxy bomb victim' isn't a joke why in god's name would the current situation make any difference to that particular plot? if the idea is to force aircrew to destroy their own aircraft then you wouldn't need to arm them would you?
Infiltrating any of the relatively low paid ground crew or security jobs would be the easiest way of getting at an aircraft, a situation being made easier by the large numbers of people being recruited to man staff the 'security' system.


Anyway, my personal experience; I am a uk air traffic controller, arrive at work for shift recently,not allowed to bring in any drink, nor any liquids,butter etc to cook my meals with. As it turns out my first two hour radar stint is very busy. After this i have only tap water to drink in the tower building. Company provides no alternative. in my half hour break i just have time to walk , airside, to the terminal restaurant where i can buy a limited selection of pricey drinks and make it back to the tower before controlling again.I have been made aware that the drinks supplied to the airside restaurant are usually not checked, only some random scans take place.I feel incensed by this, i am trusted to make many decisions whilst controlling that have a direct effect on aircraft safety yet i can't be trusted with liquid. Further , the restrictions are useless anyway if not everythiung is checked.

I just hope that the first aircraft in an incident caused by a stressed pilot or controller or both has dft staff has passengers.

At the moment i feel like refusing to work as if i can not be trusted with liquids to drink or cook with then why shoul i be trusted in front of a radar screen?

[Loose rivets]

Much of what is happening is your fault. Sorry, that's the way I feel. I went out on a limb years ago fighting this bullsh1t, and got little but the sucking of teeth from my colleagues.

It grieves me to see the amount of stress and plain suffering...yes, suffering, that this madness is causing some crews, engineers and ATC workers.

Why do you let it happen?

I think that it's the quasi-military nature of the industry that has caused this situation to persist. A long history of taking orders. I have always been against militant unions, but this madness would never happen in a factory.

Professionalism is just a word...crews are not treated as professionals. You had your chance...and blew it. It's easy to see why. In the late 60s, crews were asked if they thought they should carry their ‘status' to the outside world. i.e. be called Captain instead of Mr. Etc. It got a resounding NO. One of my captains said. "I think it's a trade, not a profession." Okay, that was his vote, but the man that said pilots would one day be equal to carriage drivers, wasn't far wrong. Carriage drivers is a clue to how long ago that was said. (From the Log c 1968)


Some time ago I suggested that radical action would only hurt the airline and its investors, and that the main trust should be against the people that are making these bizarrely wrong policies.
Now I'm not sure.

An airline that lets its crews fly without fresh water and basic food should be prosecuted. It is counter to flight safety. Therefor, to take action that may hurt them is no longer out of bounds. They need to do far, far more to defeat this madness than they are doing. They pay huge amounts to the airports...surely they have some say it how things should be done.

I am totally convinced that much of what is happening is caused by these ‘security' staff members gaining some kind of perverse pleasure by making professionals jump through ever more ridiculous hoops. You may think that this is too far fetched, but I'm all too aware of the extremes of behavior some people will go to if their lives have not met their expectations. Human nature is consistently inconsistent.

If a professional aircrew member has to disrobe / de-shoe, fine, but then there should be a full account of the reasoning behind the search, in writing to the company involved. The norm should be pre-vetted clear passage with everything packed into their flight bags that God intended.

[His dudeness]

qUOTE.
Anyway, my personal experience; I am a uk air traffic controller, arrive at work for shift recently,not allowed to bring in any drink, nor any liquids,butter etc to cook my meals with. As it turns out my first two hour radar stint is very busy. After this i have only tap water to drink in the tower building. Company provides no alternative. in my half hour break i just have time to walk , airside, to the terminal restaurant where i can buy a limited selection of pricey drinks and make it back to the tower before controlling again.I have been made aware that the drinks supplied to the airside restaurant are usually not checked, only some random scans take place.I feel incensed by this, i am trusted to make many decisions whilst controlling that have a direct effect on aircraft safety yet i can't be trusted with liquid. Further , the restrictions are useless anyway if not everythiung is checked.
It is just getting out of control, I just hope that you guys or the airline guys go on strike over it I would definetely support it. (I´m in Exec-aviation, 4 guy ops and a strike would put me out of work most likely)
I just wonder what any member of parliament would say if denied to have their own drinks for a whole shift? (what work do they anyhow?)
As one that has an airside pass also for my car, I bring in "Liquids" almost by the ton - our catering. BUT when I pass the security checkpoint - got to get out of the car and walk to a screening point about 5 meters from said car - I´m not allowed to have more than a litre...
I´m german and my licence is with the german authority. This means that I have to ask to get a socalled "ZÜP", a screening by all secret and criminal services in Germany, every 2 years. Then, if there is a record, a bloke at the "competent" authority can deny the renewal just because he feels like it. You are not told what the problem is apparently (wasn´t revoked yet - luckily). There is a way of fighting it, buts its a legal battle that can take years.
Now, if you are from, say, Luxembourg, and you did an ATP in germany, you are NOT asked to have that sort of screening.
This hole scheme was introduced by the former minister of internal affairs, Mr.Otto Schily, who just happened to be on of the lawyers for the RAF, the terrorist group that acted in germany mainly in the 70´s and 80´s, killed several people by bombing and shooting.
When I think about the morons that do things like that to me, albeit by law they are sworn in to protect me and my freedom, I´m getting...

[RoyHudd]

Dunno if the Insecurity Staff would see the funny side, tho'.

I'm all for a strike this summer....and I think the crews will comply.:)

[Symbian]

Loose Rivet one of the most lucid threads I have seen on this subject to date. Chaps take heed to what he is saying moaning about it will not achieve anything!

I find it most satisfying when one of these plongers has a go i.e. their rude I call for the supervisor and file a complaint. I have one individual now that won’t come anywhere near me which suits me fine as she is an utterly unpleasant individual. If the nature of my experience even slightly raises my blood pressure I also file a CHIRPS report. They are very interested in this subject and you will not be wasting their time. The more reports they get the more they can do for us at a level we as individuals could never achieve.

THIS IS A FLIGHT SAFETY ISSUE that is the point we should be pushing before we have another Staines!

[stellair]

Niknak

The most striking thing about the vast majority of posts here, all posted by the oh so knowlegable "experts" , is that none of you have produced a solution to the problem of preventing terrorism incidents.

The one thing I can guarantee is that, without exception, you'd all be squealing like stuck pigs and running to your ambulance chasing lawyers if the rules were relaxed and your flight was caught up in any type of incident.

How about this: Every male muslim between the ages of 16 - 60 gets screened and stopped while the rest of us get left in peace?

Too non PC or just too sensible?

Ron & Edna Johns are speaking alot of sense :ok:

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

"".... Every male muslim between the ages of 16 - 60.... ""

How do you determine who is a Muslim - we don't make them wear stars.... Many Muslims have white skin, for example, and are converts. Many Arabs are Christian. Some Muslim women have been suicide bombers. Etc. etc. Profiling, as noted frequently, does seem the way to go - and discreetly I think it's already occurring. The US authorities, for example, are already doing this for many British citizens, especially of Pakistani origin, who can enter the US via the visa waiver scheme. (The visa waiver scheme scares the hell out of the Americans - we should not think it's sacrosanct.)

[brain fade]

Alex, Ron and Edna.

OK. For the record I'm 100% with you on liquids, tweezers, Leathermans (men?), packed lunches, stroppy attitudes, surly and over assertive security employees, shoe removal, queues, scissors, toothpaste etc etc.

All I am saying is that there IS a need to pass through 'security' to screen out proxy's or impersonaters.

Incidentally the proxy bomber tactic was used in NI quite effectively. And for sure the drivers were pleased to be challenged, as they always were, thus giving them a chance to 'fess up (and run).

The point of my orig post, which you seem determined to miss, is that only a cursory encounter with 'security' is required to achieve this aim.

But that cursory check IS required. The rest is not.

[stellair]

Golf Charlie Charlie: A fair point, but you see the line I'm taking. Do what they like with pax but it can't be that difficult to impliment more stringent religious/background checks for crew only combined with Ron & Edna Johns comments about a universally regonised crew pass.

Why can't we use fingerprint/iris technology for pilots and crew, they can never be copied. This way every time I pass through security it will take 10 secs and I should be allowed to take whatever I like (within reason) when I go to work without stripping down and having bags swabbed, water stolen etc etc

[Symbian]

Aren’t we going of topic this is about crew not passengers if the crew member is a Muslim intent on doing harm then no amount of security is going to stop him her. As security could strip them naked and remove their nav bag and shine a torch where the sun doesn’t shine. As he she doesn’t need any of it to do their worst.

That’s what these security threads are about the utter farce that they make crew go through and for what.

Lets take a look at the other side of the door and if a terrorist was going to have a go which some have tried and near got beaten to death by the passengers. The world has changed as have passengers who are not going to sit there whilst some mislead fanatic kills them. Its not like the past when the right attitude was to keep your head down and let things take there course!

Cure for terrorism is there one I’m sure if it wasn’t religion then it would be something else. The big problem we have now is that they are willing to die for their cause and like kamikaze pilots that is very difficult to defend against.

Would security stop a kamikaze Muslim or any other faith pilot NO!

Lawyers now wouldn’t they have a field day if an accident was put down to the crew who had just been given a going over by security which caused them to make a mistake because they were angry at the way they had been treated. Now for you none flyers out there think about it when someone has just pissed you off how easy is it to then make a mistake. For a pilot to make that mistake can have disastrous consequences so do we really want to let this security farce continue until some poor sod drills one into the ground.
.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Ok, brain fade, yes. I accept that. You are quite right and please accept an apology for my shortness. This whole business is making me pretty... short.... these days.

REJ

[blueplume]

Watching Sesame Street and The Muppet Show will establish the identity of the most prominent characters very quickly. The only test that doesn't seem to be carried out is the Idiot Test, presumably because most would fail.

And why should the checks for "Security" Staff take any longer? They don't know anything about security. They are shown how to look at a screen and tip out your bag for you while making snide remarks at your expense. And that's just the Flight Crews, both ends of the tube.

If you want to know about security ask the Israelis. Their method (proper profiling) costs money to implement through thorough training but the results are worth it. Teach smart people how humans work, not how machines work and you will see immediate improvements and a much higher success rate.

Annoying the general public achieves nothing positive whatsoever. Apart from derisory comments such as can be found all over pprune on this subject.

Security staff asking for pay rises and going on strike because their working conditions are crap is not the answer. They should ask for better training, then they'd be better qualified and could rightly demand a better salary befitting their level of knowledge.

It's all been said before..............

[brain fade]

ron and edna

accepted with thanks.

I agree that the security farce is a severe test of ones sense of humour. Not surprising if patience wearing a bit thin here and there.;)

[grimmrad]

Just a pax speaking here - but one that is living in the US and traveling to Europe quite frequently. And avoiding LHR. I am not flying through London anymore. There are other options almost as cheap and much more convenient. And I bet that I am not the only one to do that. In the long term the airlines will loose business and that might them take actions against this.

[kontrolor]

brain fade - its not about screening crews it is about humiliating procedure.

[lotman1000]

All I am saying is that there IS a need to pass through 'security' to screen out proxy's or impersonatersIf you take the words "to pass through security" out of that, you've got it right.

But you don't need to aggressively search, however, to screen out proxies and impersonators.

[stellair]

From my post on Freigh dogs forum:

For all aircrew in Europe.

One Criminal records check, Europe wide if that is where you are to be employed, remember JAA.

One Universally recognised standard airside pass based on records check, verified by current employer, to be renewed yearly with medical and valid Europe wide.

One Fingerprint/and or Iris scan, encoded onto pass, absolutley unique!

Once this is in place a visit to security should take no more than 10 secs as they will know exactly who we are and should remove the need for these ridiculous rules.

The cost I can see would be a factor but surely if safety and prevention of terrorism is the DofTs No. 1 concern this should be no object and alot cheaper than the wages paid to these wankers that revel in enforcing bull**** rules with no lateral thought.

This I'm sure would result in a far safer airside environment and the software/hardware to do it is available.

Hands up how many times a "security officer" has taken your water off you but had no clue where your airside pass and/or licence is/was from or issued......Ludicrous

No one disputes the need for security but clearfinalsno1s coments are correct we are in danger of this becoming mainstay due to the jobs and industry created around it!

[judge11]

A multimillion pound industry has already been created together with government bureaucracies around the world to administer this window dressing to the populus. Dismantling said apparatus of commercial interests and reliquishing powers of state control of the individual, powers that have mulitiplied particularly in the UK and USA under the specious excuse of 'the war on terror', will call for a political volte face. Given that confessing to errors of judgement goes contrary to the very credo of 99% of politicians everywhere, the ongoing level of security harrassment inflicted on legitimate airside workers will continue until such time as the aforementioned groups make it clear that enough is enough.

[Dysonsphere]

Its only you Pros at the moment how long before they start chasing the Private Pilot at GA fields. This was seen at Elstree over the weekend

3 S/Branch police officers and two immigration officers have been camped out at EGTR this weekend, Friday through Monday.

Chatting to them they claim that their only brief is to show a higher profile presence.

In the meantime, not only are they checking all incoming flights from abroad, they are also checking local flights.

A colleague and his passengers were questioned upon returning from a short visit to N/weald. They were asked to produce ID and fill in disembarkation cards with names, addresses etc.

This has happened to several other a/c’s crew and passengers, after returning from a local sortie.



Wasnt aware ID was required for local flights

[old,not bold]

3 S/Branch police officers and two immigration officers have been camped out at EGTR this weekend, Friday through Monday.

Chatting to them they claim that their only brief is to show a higher profile presence. More overtime, anyone? That's the reason; nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

Going way beyond their powers to demand ID etc etc is officially known as "looking busy", to justify the overtime. Or maybe they got bored and felt like shaking down some rich gits. Both, probably.

The correct response to an illegal demand from SB, Immigration, Police or the neighbourhood busybody is "F**k **f", or for those of a gentler disposition, asking them to explain and prove their authority in law to demand that.

You are not required by law to carry ID to operate an aircraft within the UK, so far as the law is concerned, except possibly your licence (I'm not certain about that). You may need all sorts of documentation so far as the aircraft owner and/or airfield operator is concerned, for commercial, insurance and safety reasons, but that's not the Police's business. And filling in landing cards after a domestic flight is just ludicrous.

I expect the next lucrative weekend out for the lads will be Long Mynd. Tricky lot, these silent but deadly glider pilots; never know where they've been. They don't even file flight plans, can you believe that? What's more, one of 'em was a bit rude when requested, quite politely, to fill out his landing card after landing in a field in Norfolk". The sooner they're all given ASBOs and closed down, the better.......

[Danny]

Keep this to security and the effects on professional flight crew please. If you have concerns over your civil liberties or private flying then use the Jet Blast or Private flying forums as appropriate.

[man.mong]

hi sorry for intruding on to your site, i am one the annoying security gaurds at manchester airport, i hope one of the friendlier ones there are some of us honest. most of the security staff at our level will agree with most of the rules been total rubbish but have to keep to them as d.f.t like tokeep an eye on us with thier many cameras.
As proffessional pilots you have a(or should have) more clout with the d.f.t perhaps you could find an answer to why babys bottles are allowed through when tasted by the parents and yet staff are not allowed bottled drinks even when prepared to taste them? also on the liquids testing points there are alot of products (innocent ones) which will a give a positive result when tested we are asked to avoid these things, surely the terrorists could easily enough find out which products these are and simply put there liquid explosives in such packaging. have tried to find out on these points myself but am deemed to unimportant. hope the others on security dont give you too much hassle and believe me most of us also think alot of the rules are stupid, as are the powers that constantly watch over us on c.ct.v

[No_Speed_Restriction]

Lets hope youre on North Gate duty tomorrow morning; would make a nice refreshing change.

[Symbian]

Man.mong

It’s a shame more of your colleagues aren’t like minded it would make everybody’s life a lot easier. I appreciate you do not set the rules and noises are been made personally I feel it needs a day of action on both sides of the Atlantic.

I’m sorry that you have been tired with the same brush it is unfair, but unfortunately a lot of your colleagues around the country are complete ^%£&£$*^&$&£*&%(&^ and are an affront to aviation safety for reason’s already stated. Politeness cost’s nothing and goes along way to making our life’s easier.

Please carry on the way you are perhaps it will rub off on some of your zealous colleagues.

[No_Speed_Restriction]

A funny time was when I forgot to declare a roll on deodorant before going through x ray at North Gate. Then after having my bag frisked I was told in a cocky manner "we'll let you off this time".I said thank you but in my head I was saying "Thank you, have a nice day and please fu£k off!"

[man.mong]

cheers symbian unfortunatly though like so many other gaurds who may actually possess a bit of common sense and independent thinking i am looking for another job, the management at manchester will soon be left with drones who will not argue with them,which it seems they want, total overhaul of the management and d.f.t would be a great idea.

[Symbian]

Man.mong

You are not the first security person to leave for the same reason’s you obviously are and I wish you the best in your search. I would say tell the management when you do leave the reasons why but I fear they would see it as a feather in their cap rather then be concerned that they are upsetting so many people needlessly! But then it just shows apart from individuals such as your self what cretins we up against!

[Lost in Saigon]

One Criminal records check

One Universally recognised standard airside pass based on records check, verified by current employer

One Fingerprint AND Iris scan, encoded onto pass, absolutely unique!

Once this is in place a visit to security should take no more than 10 secs as they will know exactly who we are and should remove the need for these ridiculous rules.

In Canada, we have recently adopted this strategy and it was a VERY welcome change.

First a scanner reads your security card, then most security points use the fingerprint scan to confirm who you are. Takes 10 seconds and you are through the door without any further checks.

[ATCO1987]

Hi All,

Im a guard at Bristol (for my sins) and Im fed up with the liquid restrictions as much as you guys. In some respects, these measures should remain for passengers and perhaps some airport staff, but I don't see the point in such restrictions being imposed on aircrew. Unfortunately DfT don't take much notice of any feedback!

I dont know too much about the new testing process (as I seldom work in the passenger search comb) but I think the ratio is something like 1/100 (pointless). If this has already been mentioned, then excuse me, havent read ALL of the posts on this thread.

Security staff to be searched when entering the RZ? We are. Or at least in the UK we are.

As for a universally recognised pass, I wish! It would certainly make sense for aircrew, however I wish there was just one DfT standard RZ for airport staff in the UK. Might happen one day, if they ever decide to spend some time looking at REAL measures to make security screening effective.

[jetset lady]

Going back to the signs regarding being "nice" to the security guards, they don't exactly help themselves. I recently had a particularly long 4 sector day out of a certain Southern UK airport and some of the crew had bought sandwiches and snacks due to the not so appetising crew food. Low and behold, security decided these were far to dangerous due to mayonaisse dressings etc. and they were promptly confiscated. As we were waiting for the security hall doors to close, I received a phone call from ops asking us to return to the crew room due to a delay. We nipped back in the doors and were gobsmacked to find the guys and girls in security happily tucking in to OUR lunch! (Guess what dressing I'm using in my sandwiches next time!) Then they wonder why we've all had enough! They seem to use the rules to suit themselves. :*

[Wefeedumall]

Girtbar, I think this link takes you to the petition you have set up on the Number 10 website.
OK guys & girls, providing Danny etc don't mind this being posted here then let's all get signing and see if we can make a difference. It took me about 30 seconds so nothing to lose and just maybe we can go back to more sensible security again.
:O
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/

[Telstar]

From the Irish Times:

Aircraft security regulations to be maintained in spite of doubts

Jamie Smyth

European Diary: Security measures introduced at European airports in November 2006 in the wake of a foiled plot to blow up British aircraft with liquid explosives came under the spotlight at the European Parliament last week.

The Liberal Group held a public hearing on regulation 1546, which restricts passengers to carrying a maximum of one litre of liquids, gels and pastes in separate 100ml amounts onto aircraft.

The EU chose not to annul the regulation yesterday following its first six-month review of the measure, citing a "continued risk posed by liquid explosives".

Yet at last week's hearing, scientists, MEPs and the airline industry strongly criticised the rules. "Senseless", "idiotic" and an "infringement of fundamental freedoms" were some of the charges laid against the security regulation on liquids by a succession of speakers.

"The threat as well as the technology exists, but the measures are neither effective nor proportionate and pose a considerable nuisance to the vast majority of passengers," said Liberal MEP Ignasi Guardans, who co-chaired the public hearing.

"Extra security measures need to focus not on inanimate objects but on people," said Christophe Naudin, director of international security at the University of Paris II, who demonstrated his hypothesis by smuggling a detonator for a bomb and explosive liquids past the parliament's security staff.

"You can make explosive devices with two solids or with liquids of less than 100ml . . . these measures have not enhanced security, rather they are more to give passengers the feeling that flying is safe."

Carol Van Eijk, professor of physics at Delft University, revealed how the X-ray scanners used at airports cannot tell the difference between explosives and aftershave.

"Identification of liquid explosives is very difficult to do and none of the present methods can do the job in a fast and efficient way that is needed at airports," he said.

Despite these limitations, an EU committee of experts on aviation security decided at a recent meeting that the restrictions should remain.

The committee, which is made up of experts from all 27 member states, must review the regulation every six months to assess whether it is still appropriate. It meets in secret and does not have to make public the justification for imposing or retaining a particular measure. This process, known as comitology, is commonly used to enact a raft of regulations that become law in the EU.

MEPs can express an opinion on the regulations, which are decided in consultation with the European Commission, but cannot amend them.

Several MEPs at the hearing said this secretive procedure meant there was little public scrutiny of regulation 1546 before it was adopted into European law.

The commission and EU states deny this. "MEPs can give an opinion on the regulation and if some didn't read it that is not our fault," said a commission official, who admitted the liquids rules are "imperfect", but are the best possible response.

Meanwhile, the EU committee of experts has loosened the regulation somewhat.

"We think the ban on liquids is necessary," the Swedish member of the committee told The Irish Times. "But a separate proposal to restrict and harmonise rules on the size of hand luggage has been delayed for a year to see if it has any security benefit."

Under the regulation the EU had planned to set the size of hand luggage to a maximum of 56x45x25cm later this month. But fierce lobbying by the industry, which feared travel chaos, helped persuade the EU experts to postpone the measure.

"The problem would have been transfer passengers coming from outside the EU," says Frank O'Connell, president of the European Travel Retail Council. "They would arrive at EU airports with bags that simply didn't meet the EU regulations."

O'Connell, who is also director of Aer Rianta Retail, has witnessed similar chaos caused by the implementation of the liquid restrictions for transfer passengers from outside Europe. Every day 2,500 litres of duty free are confiscated at Frankfurt airport from non-EU transfer passengers because the regulation does not recognise security procedures outside the EU. Meanwhile tit-for-tat rules introduced by Australia now mean that EU passengers have their duty-free goods confiscated upon arrival there. "The rules are causing a huge level of uncertainty for passengers and causing a chill in the duty-free business," says O'Connell.

Aer Rianta's reliance on duty free (it also operates shops in Russia, the US and the Middle East) was the reason the Republic voted against the regulation. Two other countries abstained in the crucial vote, which has never been made public.

But the sceptical evidence presented by experts at the hearing last week suggests it may be time for a proper debate about regulation 1546, and also how to open up the comitology procedure to more scrutiny to boost public accountability.

[Loose rivets]

We nipped back in the doors and were gobsmacked to find the guys and girls in security happily tucking in to OUR lunch! (Guess what dressing I'm using in my sandwiches next time!) Then they wonder why we've all had enough! They seem to use the rules to suit themselves.


You were gobsmaked. Okay, that was an initial reaction. What did you do next?


I was going to say that it's easy for me to sit here and say what should be done....but it isn't. I get as mad as hell just reading this stuff. I can put my hand on my heart and say that firstly, those thieving bastards would not have got my food. Secondly, if I had come into the loop and seen them eating YOUR food, I would have caused mayhem. On a good day I would have called the police, on a bad day I would no doubt have got into a lot of trouble...but it would have been trouble that I was willing to see through to the end, be it high court or whatever.

You (all) have to DO something other than let off steam. As I said earlier, the airlines are not doing enough to stop this madness, so they must bear some of the cost of a protest.

It has to be at least a nation-wide effort. To be fair, you should give warning of the day on which this @#% is going to stop. I am bewildered by the ineffectual, meandering time-wasting by the unions and government bodies. Just what the blazes are they paid for?




Quote "I shall be taking essentials of course. Water and......." Emelia Earhart.

[ATCO1987]

Talking as a guard, I think thats ridiculous and you wouldnt catch me eating/using confiscated items (Id say that goes for many of my colleagues where I work, certainly those at Crew Search).

Did you not put in a complaint?

[jetset lady]

ATCO1987 and Loose rivets,

I can assure you I put in complaints to the supervisor on duty, the dft, anyone else I could think of and informed the airline I work for. And guess what. They apparently "take this sort of thing very seriously and will investigate the incident fully"! Yeah, right! I have since heard that this is not an isolated incident here and although I appreciate that it is probably, or hopefully, a minority of idiots that do this sort of thing, that minority is, as is so usually the case, making life a nightmare for their colleagues as well as the rest of us. I wish I'd given them more hell at the time but can only say I was so amazed that anyone could do that, I was left temporarily speechless! Probably a good thing in hindsight! :sad:

[ATCO1987]

Hopefully you're right about it only being a minority, but you're right, its them that ruins it for the rest of us.

[MelbPilot85]

Gotta say that this is an absolute load of sh*t. For one thing, aircrew have many more useful tools at their disposal, what is 100ml+ of liquid going to do? Apologies if this point has been brought up, but I couldn't be bothered wading through pages of posts on a point which annoys the buggery out of me

[lomapaseo]

It bothers me that this discussion is seeking to create a caste system between flight crew (pilots) and the greater masses of the unwashed.

There are some good arguments about bonafide card carrying pilots being low risk, But I must remind you that there are equally good arguments about a much larger percentage of the general population being equally low risk. The more that the small population of pilots push for their own sphere of declaring themselves low risk, the more that the much larger population of the general public are going to rebel against one group being declared more clean than themselves. I would much more be inclined to support a petition to either lower the overall security visible inconvenience for all or at least demonstrate that the relief is not exclusive of a larger majority of low risk individuals.

[old,not bold]

lomapaseo

I think you may be missing the point that it doesn't matter if a pilot is high or low risk; if he or she is about to take control of an aircraft, because that's what's on the roster, there's no point in searching him/her for weapons or means of suicidal destruction.

[Stone Cold II]

No Speed Restriction I thought you would have learned your lesson by now! You know how dangerous a roll on deodorant can be!

What is the world coming to. :)

[peterpallet]

I am not nor have ever been associated with airplanes, except as a passenger, but am a regular reader of pprune and have read of the problems that you all are having with "SECURITY"

I have added my name to the email petition above to express my disgust with your treatment.

Let us hope that someone listens and that enough people like myself lend their weight to the petition

Peter

[ShedsRus]

Girtbar, I think this link takes you to the petition you have set up on the Number 10 website.
OK guys & girls, providing Danny etc don't mind this being posted here then let's all get signing and see if we can make a difference. It took me about 30 seconds so nothing to lose and just maybe we can go back to more sensible security again.:hmm:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/

Have just been on site to add my two pence to the debate to note that only 9 (nine) people appear to have signed.
If I mis read it I apologise but if right this only goes to show what a bunch of old whingers we are if we can't even make the effort to change this farce which we moan about and can't be bothered to fight.
What was the old saying: Don't complain about the government if you didn't bother to vote. You get what you deserve.
Surely we deserve better than the staus quo (which will only get worse):hmm:

[Litebulbs]

We are almost where the authorities want us now! The more stringent checks are here and not too much fuss has been kicked up. Right, what do you do next, make them tougher, get people more stressed, so stressed until they unite and say no, we have had enough of this. Then offer a solution. An easy solution. Some form of electronic identification, either retinal or by fingerprints. Tie this information in with your CRC. Sit quiz where you answer a few simple questions where you can be profiled and their you have it, FEAR AND CONTROL!

Once all that good info has been gathered on you, screening will be a doddle, just walk up and pass through. The rest of the mass will be asking how come you got through and they are producing a urine sample to check for ingested combustible fluids. The answer will be an application form for full human profiling and their you have it, ID card's through the back door!

Just smile next time you are having your meat n two veg caressed and think, at least you have not been assimilated to the Borg!

[llondel]

Lost in Saigon:
First a scanner reads your security card, then most security points use the fingerprint scan to confirm who you are.

I hope it's a better system than this one: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/04/fingerprint_merc_chop/ and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4396831.stm

A Malaysian businessman has lost a finger to car thieves impatient to get around his Mercedes' fingerprint security system. Accountant K Kumaran, the BBC reports, had at first been forced to start the S-class Merc, but when the carjackers wanted to start it again without having him along, they chopped off the end of his index finger with a machete.

Mythbusters also defeated a number of fingerprint security locks fairly easily.

[Litebulbs]

In my opinion and only my opinion, it is not about safety, it is about getting detailed information of all of us, to be used to a lesser or greater extent by what authority is holding the information. The technology is out their to electronically record every person to a level that would be incredibly hard to duplicate. The second inspection would be the human interface, to just take a sample visual inspection. The old mark one eyes are generally very good at spotting things.
The vote is still out on how much the US authorities knew about 9/11 prior to it actually happening. When money and oil are in the equation, honesty and trust go out the window. Would the suffragette movement had the effect on todays times, if all the activists had been profiled and all their personal information been held by the state? We would all be still in the grafting in the mill house if union activists had to provide a retinal scan before logging into the sweat shop!
Still, it is mighty annoying in the morning getting caught behind a couple of crews getting all their kit checked when I am already late!!!
Another annoying thing is, that at LGW, all people passing though the security gates and Concorde House have to remove their shoes, to allow central search and the staff route by it, to only have a percentage of people remove their shoes! If you search 100% of staff through all other screening areas, you do not have to search as many passengers going through central search, and the route that most managers use to get airside!
The worlds gone mad!

[lomapaseo]

I think you may be missing the point that it doesn't matter if a pilot is high or low risk; if he or she is about to take control of an aircraft, because that's what's on the roster, there's no point in searching him/her for weapons or means of suicidal destruction.

I'm not at all worried about the pilot's susicidal leanings. The greater risk, minimal as it may be, is that the pilot will subcomb to girl friend pressure and take through some lotion for her travel use when I can not. Then of course it later turns out that the girl friend intends to use the lotion for nefarious purposes, against another flight so we all lose.

OK so I admit, I'm not going to win any arguments on this board, but neither will the pilot community prevail in front of the media or the public unless they act in concert.

[stellair]

Wefeedumall, Thanks for that....

Everybody reading this please sign below!

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/
:mad:

[Jay Arr]

Guys, this important petition is for UK residents only. International pilots such as me are affected by this insanity when flying to/from the UK also, albeit not on a daily basis like you guys. Accordingly, anyone know how we can sign this petition also? Thanks.


http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/

[flyingbug]

Jetset Lady,

PLEASE put a CHIRP report in, detailing how you felt stressed whilst reporting for duty, having seen your lunch being stolen.:=
Unbelievable!!

FB

[ZFT]

Jay Arr,

Just a minor correction. Not just UK residents but non resident, UK citizens as well may sign these petitions.

[rubik101]

JetSet Lady, sorry to be crude about it but get your boyfriend to provide the dressing next time.
If the security staff have to abide by the same rules as we do then how come I see them drinking Lucozade, Cola, fruit drinks from cardboard cartons etc? They most certainly do not have the same restrictions as we aircrew, in spite of what some security posters might be telling us. The rules may be the same but the observance most certainly is not.
I have come to the conclusion that the whole thing is now a farce of nonsensical proportions and no-one in a position of authority has the guts to question it. It is the Emporers' new clothes all over again.
btw, could whoever posted the on line Gov't petition correct the spelling for 'carrying', please?

[RoyHudd]

As the security people checking us all are so concerned about explosives, what protection is provided for them in the event that a suicide bomber masquerading as a member of staff decides to blow himself/herself up at the security check-point?

Surely the authorities must provide protective barriers (bombproof) at the least, to protect their staff and the innocent pilots/cabin crew/staff who are going through the checks at the time.

If the threat is serious, it does not stop at detection.

[carousel]

Exellent idea! But who pays? Half the aircrew on lo-cost's have no airport id because they won't pay the £80 to £100, so I don't suppose they will want to pay for more expensive bio-metric versions.

[Delta Wun-Wun]

Roy,
Don`t think they are concerned with a detection. Went through Manch last week. One of the CC stopped, had forgotten to put a roll on deodourant in a plastic bag with other stuff. (Hands up and apologised). But then she wasn`t allowed to put it in the plastic bag with her other stuff in the security area. She would have to leave the area and then come back once it was done.
So if she had have been carry something to endanger us she could have then got rid of it outside the security area.:ugh:
Then when she came back through she was subjected to a test of the contents of the plastic back with their new testing kit. Not a very scientific way of testing especially when the security guard knocks the testing strip upside down onto a table during the test.:D
:ok:

[llondel]

But then she wasn`t allowed to put it in the plastic bag with her other stuff in the security area. She would have to leave the area and then come back once it was done.

That's definitely inconsistent with other airports then, based on the two clueless individuals in front of me at Stansted last week who had nothing in plastic bags but were allowed to search through their hand luggage and find everything, hand it to the security man who put it all (after checking the quoted volume on ech item) in a plastic bag he took from the supply on top of the x-ray machine. But then they weren't wearing flight uniforms...

[Delta Wun-Wun]

Did ask what he was testing for?
"Explosives"
"Yes but what sort?"
"Explosives!"
He then refered me to the manual next to his "exstensive testing kit" pointing at various pages.:rolleyes:
Perhaps some training may be required if security staff are to be asked to undertake these tasks.
Gave up trying to argue....our passengers were delayed enough as it is.

[moist]

IF I was even the dimmest of terrorists, I would know exactly what happens at a security gate in any airport.
So, I would bring nothing suspicious with me in order to gain entry as aircrew, provided I had some uniform, forged ID or other.
Therefore I ask, what in the name of terrorism - searching any aircrew - is any use to the "idiots at security"?
The whole point is that I, the genuine aircrew have control ALREADY, as soon as you let me through.
An idiot terrorist has a more difficult job to take my seat at this moment of getting through. He has no crew, no aircraft and so has to do something drastic to gain control. That may well be spotted even by a cleaner. How many loose terrorists have we seen so far??? Zilch.
So back at the security gate, why give me a hard time if you're going to let me through anyway, even after you take my semtex sandwich away? Remember I have control as soon as you allow me in, with suicidal tendencies I wouldn't even be hungry!
So why on earth couldn't I be allowed to bring a b****y couldron of sloppy Goulash with me, as all it's gonna help me do, is fart!
LET AIRCREW GO! (yes I signed it).

[Mac the Knife]

BoingBoing reader and Citizen Security Analyst jesse says,"A couple weeks ago my family came to New York, where I live, from my hometown near Salt Lake City. Before leaving, my mother had purchased a small tube of lotion and put it in her purse. When she got to the security checkpoint at the airport, she realized she still had the lotion. She handed it over to the TSA worker who told her that it would be donated to a local homeless shelter. Could it be that the FAA ban on liquids is really a plot to rid the country of homeless people, through the use of explosive liquids?"

http://boingboing.net/

[Pjlot]

Ther are very valid reasons to have restrictions on flights in todays world. If there was to be a terrorist attack with liquid bombs the airline industry would suffer greatly, ALot of airlines would go bankrupt as public confidence would suffer and people would not fly unless completely essential to do so, like what happened post 9 - 11.

The information below is an actual incident that happened. The liquid was hid in a drinking water bottle. A mini explosion is enough to cause decompression of an aircraft resulting in a catastrofic losses.

security is a nesessary evil in todays civil aiation world. It is something that is there to protect us all from suffering another 9 - 11. May be we should all think twice before we patition any authority!

On December 11, 1994, Flight 434 was on its second leg from Cebu to Tokyo when a bomb exploded, killing one passenger. Authorities later discovered that a passenger on the aircraft’s preceding leg was Ramzi Yousef, who United States authorities have branded a master Al-Qaida bomber and terrorist. He was later convicted of the first World Trade Center bombing, for which he was sentanced to death by lethal injection. Yousef boarded the flight under an assumed name…

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.

[merlinxx]

They've just achieved their goal my causing pure unadulterated mayhem to all and sundry in the air transport industry. Goal achieved I would say, 'tis about time there were some real security applications applied, not just using numptys. Have some real humint applied.

[Winch-control]

Yep; They've won! look how easy it is to get your back up. Not to mention the reaction to security..

[Ancient Observer]

You should know that BAA (bless them) are telling the politicos that some of the airport delays are due to the "bad behaviour" of Flight and Cabin crew. Don't you just love them?

[stellair]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/ :mad:

[mojocvh]

As the security people checking us all are so concerned about explosives, what protection is provided for them in the event that a suicide bomber masquerading as a member of staff decides to blow himself/herself up at the security check-point?


Actually that is Exactly what is happening in Iraq, no need to go through security, just blow up in front of it. And still the authorities blindly plod on..................................:ugh:

[transilvana]

it´s very easy, they want war, give them war: get to security and start dropping all your liquids into the counter, tooth paste, cologne, deodorant, listerine... after 20-30 guys doing the same I dont´think they will try it agian, do it daily, everybody. I am f.... tyred of stupid politicos that no nothing about security.

[Raggyman]

I am paying cargo, and always hate flying through Heathrow, I have never meet a bunch of job worths in my life. I totally disagree with the only one bag policy, especially when you have your overnight gear, in case your luggage gets lost, and a laptop. There is no reason why you shouldn't be able to take two bags! If they think it is conjestion at the screening points, then how about they put more staff on. The stupid thing is that a handbag is often considered an extra bag. Security at heathrow annoy the hell out of me, mainly cause see heaps of other people having problems getting through as well, and yet they don't offer any help.

On time, I was going through heathrow, and noticed that there was a big pair of dress maker scissors sitting on a bench at a retailers. Had brought it up with security, and their response was, we have got no control over the retailers, only to say that he would ask the retailer to make sure that they aren't on the bench.

Now, my question was this. What would have happened if the scissors had gone missing. I bet that if they did go missing, no one would have brought up the fact that they were missing. Somehow don't think they would have shut down heathrow that is for sure, which is what they should have done. A good thing though is that the terrorists we are dealing with aren't the most clever people in the world.

What shocks me more, is the fact that there is very little checks on identity. I was absolutely shocked on my first trip to the UK, when other than check in, and boarding the aircraft, no other checks were done.

[stellair]

Pjlot

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

I think this may be a case of mis reporting, liquid nitroglycerin is highly unstable, I doubt 'Yousef' would have made it out the front door without it expoloding.


Raggyman, I feel for you but TBH we are not concerned with restrictions for pax, it's crew who are subjected to the same restrictions and do this day in day out that this thread is focussed on as we are the ones who have much more dangerous equipment available to us than scissors. We are also background checked and are, well, I am, happy for any level of screening to be issued with our airside pass and/or licence if it means we are left in peace to get on with doing as professional a job as possible for the REAL safety and security of our pax or in my case cargo.

[Nubboy]

"Raggyman, I feel for you but TBH we are not concerned with restrictions for pax"

Stellair, get real, if you fly short haul around europe with mixed fleets, then as sure as eggs is eggs you end up paxing. Some of us do it at least once per block of duty, if not more.

You therefore end up going through two sets of aggro, the keen, hard working eagle eyed sandwich pinchers at crew gates, and the totally overwhelmed alert helpful uniformed search police at the pax gates. With night stop gear, and flight cases, and restricted to one bag, and testing of liquids.

Raggyman is absolutely right. To denigrate his post is to show contemp to the people who buy our tickets, and pay YOUR wages. It's a nonsense for EVERYONE. Period.

[SLFguy]

Nubboy...I think it may be you that needs to get real...I've read pprune long enough to know that most aircrew, (other than regarding safety related matters), couldn't give a flying f*ck about us SLF.
And before any hand wringing posts use the search button to assist yourselves in a little research.

As I said in a previous post - secruity for SLF as it stands is, I'm afraid, a fact of life - for aircrew I agree it needs addressing.
But they HAVE to be seen as separate issues otherwise it ain't gonna get any better.

Now send a hostie...I'm thirsty..:p

[Symbian]

No offence to SLF but this is about aircrew security procedures the two are very different.

[Nubboy]

I stand by what I say.

I have a whole series of duties where I start by operating, then have to PAX to a outstation to night stop then operate over the next few days. At the end of it I then PAX back to base before I START operating....

A chance to see both sides:ugh:

so tell me again how the issues are unrelated.

But Raggyman is right. It's the UK where I get the most hassle, no matter how I go through security.

[stellair]

Nubboy,

I show contempt for no one here, we have a common interest.

Re read my last post and raggymans.

He is a passenger and this thread is regarding AIRCREW security procedures. They are seperate issues. Not once did I say I am not concerned about pax, that's a ludicrous statement they do buy tickets and pay YOUR wages, DHL,TNT,UPS and the Post Office pay mine. His opinions are more than valid and I do agree with him entirely if the title of the post was 'security for passengers'.

Like yourself I often travel as a passenger to meet my aircraft all over europe but the difference is when I do so I'm not operating an aeroplane and using my airside pass/licence to clear security and so accept that as any other passenger I must be subjected to the same rules.

[stellair]

Oh, by the way SLFguy, You, the SLF are the most important thing in the world when you are onboard the aeroplane, making sure you, everyone else and the aircraft get to destination safely is top of the list, no exceptions. I felt a bit sorry for you there mate :sad: well, right up to the point youre sipping a G+T :{

What happens at security, as you well know, is another thing outside any sphere of authority aircrew have!

As I said in a previous post - secruity for SLF as it stands is, I'm afraid, a fact of life - for aircrew I agree it needs addressing.
But they HAVE to be seen as separate issues otherwise it ain't gonna get any better.



You speak sense :ok:

[mojocvh]

And you, sir, need to remember who ultimately pays your wages. :rolleyes:

[AlexL]

as far as i'm aware myself and all the other aircrew I meet are keenly aware who pays our wages. I think the pax security is ludicrous as well as the aircrew security HOWEVER what is more rediculous is the idiots in whitehall who think that both should be treated the same when they are plainly not. Both security channels should be reviewed, however any sensible risk assesment and security assesment would and should come out with two completely different solutions. the issues that security are looking for are completely different with aircrew and pax. The 'liquids' issue serves to illustrate the stupidity of the whole situation, but that is only a symptom of the real underlying issues.
Before Pax and aircrew tear each other apart about who pays who's wages, perhaps we all ought to remind BAA and the DfT who pays their bloody wages. :*

[sled dog]

What about a 24 hr " withdrawal of labour " ( sounds better than " strike " ). That should focus a few minds.
I had the misfortune to travel through LGW a few months ago, and have vowed never again, if possible.
Totally stupid procedures. Luckily i do not live in B`liars paradise, and i have great sympathy for you that do.
" Grinning Gordon " will not be any better. Good luck.:sad:

[SpannerInTheWerks]

Yes, we had the worst day ever as passengers at Kingston, Jamaica last year.

Five hour transit stop, then flight delayed with several additional security checks! The passengers revolted and refused to pass through the 'last' security check. After intervention by the security manager the whole thing became a farce.

Then, after all the checks, security guards were waiting on the way to the aircraft to relieve passengers of liquids which had passed the previous checks!!!

Well that was it for my partner, she poured the two bottles of Coke over the legs and feet of the lady security officer and walked off in disgust!

Sticky situation.

SITW

[Raggyman]

Paying PAX, but signed the petition anyhow, cause I think it is crazy. The main thing is though is that aircrew and us (PAX) suffer the same pain by having to put up with job worth security staff, who show absolutely no common sense in my opinion. That is probably more of the point I am making really. I would just hate to have to put up with it every day! Would drive me absolutely mental.

Anyhow, not sure what it is with Heathrow, but nothing but nightmare when I go through there. Anyone would think that they are new to running an airport. That is a totally different topic.. but now I take a 4 hour detour just so I don't have to go through there.

[Nubboy]

Raggyman

thanks for your comments and adding your signature.

I feel that you're observations and comments are valid on this forum, especially in the light that often I go through the same garbage screening as you as a passenger, then go to the crew room on arrival, and go through the same rigmarole again as operating crew. Both times in the same uniform, same person, yet once with a pasasenger ticket and once with crew ID.

More often than not the crew checks are more annoying.:mad:

The point you make about avoiding Heathrow is especially valid for us commerciallly.

I'm entirely in favour of appropiate levels of security, for everyone. But for goodness sake let them be consistent, practical and focused instead of this arbitrary officialdom we suffer with now.

[Raggyman]

I don't know who is running the show there, but they are definitely not very good at what they do.

I am totally convinced that there is a moNkey (capital N inserted to protect the innocent), in charge of things there. Would love to give them the hint that, if you have large security lines, to actually put on more staff. God knows they charge enough in tax that is for sure.

[Pjlot]

:confused:
Quote:
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
I think this may be a case of mis reporting, liquid nitroglycerin is highly unstable, I doubt 'Yousef' would have made it out the front door without it expoloding.

I take your point but this is not being misreported, check out the NTSB for the full report.

All in all i understand the frustration go air crew having to go throught continuous security checks! If this were to change and a more relaxed approach was taken, what sould stop some plot being carried out. It may take years of planning but past attacks on airlines have proven this to be the cacse. Also what is to stop some unscrupulous crew member commiting a terrorist act while on the job! I know security checks are completed into the past of airline employees but alot of airlines do not link these with foreign authorities!

[Raggyman]

Yeah, well the whole thing is silly anyhow when you think about it...

The war of the Imaginary Friends - My god is better than your god.

To be honest I don't want to go to either place, cause guaranteed it's gonna be full of nut cases.

[lotman1000]

Also what is to stop some unscrupulous crew member commiting a terrorist act while on the job!Whatever the answer is to that question, it would probably not include removing nail clippers from someone with on-board access to a fire axe, taking sandwiches away from an operating pilot, or assigning searchers to grope male pilots' genitals on their way to work.

Get the point?

[SLFguy]

"assigning searchers to grope male pilots' genitals on their way to work"


If that were standard procedure I doubt this thread would ever have existed..:rolleyes:

[j2wo]

So where is the security here:

I work in retail, part time, at a certain London airport, put up with this 'security' theatre every evening and then behind my cash desk, is a pair of scissors?!? Oh dear....:} Combine that with fact I'm only on a temporary pass at the moment!!

[Raggyman]

Yeah, best way to think about it really..... Security Theatre...
Maybe the only prerequesite is that you have a drama degree?

[DidIdothat]

How about dressing up with your mate as policemen carrying your Uzi submachine guns through.:eek:

When was the last time you saw a bobby being stopped for a glance at his ID.:ok:

Every day it's a different challenge by a different jobsworth:=

Did
:}

[Firestorm]

Instead of whingeing on Pprune why not write to you MP, to Gwyneth Dunwoody (chairman of the Transport Select Committee), the Home Office, your Base Captains, your Chief Pilots, your Compnay Council reps, CHIRP, or someone who might take a bit of notice if several sacks of mail turned up on their doorstep or in their ministerial dispatch boxes?

Maybe pilots for once should get unified about an issue instead of waiting for someone else to do something about it? :ugh:

[SLFguy]

You haven't actually read the thread have you Firestorm...:ugh:

[cargo boy]

If this were to change and a more relaxed approach was taken, what sould stop some plot being carried out. It may take years of planning but past attacks on airlines have proven this to be the cacse. Also what is to stop some unscrupulous crew member commiting a terrorist act while on the job

Errr... I seem to remember two terrorist bomb attacks on the London Transport system, one succesful and another successful one on the Madrid railway system. Now, how many times have you had to go through a security system to get on those transport systems since then? Speak up! I can't hear you.

The only thing I can infer from the current Terror Porn show is that the current DfT rules are so good that the aura of their success has somehow managed to filter out and cover the Underground and Bus transport network in its absolute efficiency. In fact, the people behind the current security procedures are so brilliant that there hasn't been anyone trampled by a rampaging elephant in the UK since they implemented their regime either. :rolleyes:

Sadly, I believe the petition will be of no use. It is a fob used by the Bliar governemnt to let the people think they actually have a say. The DfT will simply say that they have to implement their regime in the current way because it is so successful and they are not at liberty to tell us why because it is strictly on a need to know basis. It is the classical Catch-22 situation and they know it. :ugh:

Fear not, those little dictators at the security checkpoints who blindly follow the orders from the security dictators above are keeping the airways safe from exploding nail clippers and you can rest safe in the knowledge that you are most unlikely to be hit by a rampaging elephant. Well, at least in the UK. :hmm:

[HyFlyer]

We hear that Cern will be launching another mega machine to determine the theory of everything......and that got me thinking.....

One of the theories is that there are lots of parallel universes out there....

What I want to know from the Physicists (and I think I have the right..as my tax Euros have payed for their little toy) is exactly how do I get a ticket to go to one of these parallel universes.....

The one where you can take your kid to see the cockpit......that taking a flight was one of life's little excitements to look forward to........
Some of you may even remember that universe........
P.S. if they could als make it the one where Burnley could win a Championship again...that would be great...but perhaps at this point I go too far........

[stellair]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/


Keep signing guys, good effort so far :ok:

[ChristiaanJ]

.... one of these parallel universes.....
The one where you can take your kid to see the cockpit......where taking a flight was one of life's little excitements to look forward to........
Some of you may even remember that universe........I do....
I sidestepped into one of those parallel universes for a couple of hours... on one of the last "round-the-bay" AF Concorde flights.
Including a cockpit visit, to see it all still worked as I helped to plan, design and test it nearly thirty years before.
And the flight was a big excitement, not a little one.
No names or numbers.... the thought police might be watching....

[K.Whyjelly]

Well its wet and miserable outside and the telly is rubbish, so I decided to scroll through the list of petitioners to see who I knew, (honest, life here is not that sad yet, and as an added bonus saw names that rang a bell from thru the mists of time). What I did notice was the names from my own company and how few of the many hundreds of pilots (and indeed cabin crew as well) that we employ I recognised and are actually listed. Is it not possible that we could all mention this petition to our crews tomorrow and see if they are actually aware that it is running? Is it possible that there are operational crew not aware of it ( and dare i ask it, not aware of pprune???). Personal preference to sign it but the more people that are made aware of its exsistance the better. I seem to recall that the musician mob lobbied very well and carried their demands with sheer numbers and a well argued case?

[Out Of Trim]

Can someone please help me!!! are security guards doing liquid testing at std??? currently facing disciplinary for refusing to do liquid testing...how dangerous is this to me personally other than pax or aircrew beating me to death for wasting their time!!!:confused:


Do you mean at STN - Stansted?

I imagine, all UK Airports would have to do these new tests under DFT Instructions. :yuk:

How Dangerous, Very - If it's Nitroglycerin your testing!

[Firestorm]

Thank you for your astute, well constructed observation and invaluable advice SLFguy.

You obviously think that Pprune is more influential than it really is. The discussion here is interesting, and the exchange of views and experiences is useful in as much as we come to realize that our individual experiences are not isolated, but part of a long string of inconsistencies perpetrated by the security contractors at UK airports. My point is that the people who need to know about this state of affairs will not be reading Pprune: they have better things to do with their time. If we want things to change we have to send carefully documented reports of each incident to the People In Charge. This applies equally, albeit separately, to crews and passengers.

[Firestorm]

I say that it applies separately because we are different. As crew we go through background checks, similar to a low level vetting, which is supposed to allow us unhindered access to the restricted zone to carry out our duties as aircrew. Passengers do not have this level of access, and have no background check, and neither should they: there is no need for them to have either. Passengers should be treated with respect, and not with the suspicion that they are all potential criminals. Crew should be treated like professionals, otherwise it rather exposes the background check as a wasted exercise in unnecessary intrusion into one's private details, and a costly one at that.

I come back to my first post, however. It's not much use making these posts here on Pprune: we all have a similar opinion and have had similar experiences at the hands of the Goons. Our experiences should be sent to people ho can exert some influence, and who are actually in a position to make decisions. There are plenty of people to whom our letters can be sent to (as listed previously).

[Firestorm]

SLFguy: you won't be aware of this I don't expect, but some of the pilot's organizations are currently compiling reports from crew about the inconsistencies and heavy handed approach towards crews. To assist in this it would be really helpful if crews would forward their letters to the relevant organizations, one letter per report will carry more weight than one letter with several reports in it. SLFguy: it would be very helpful if you could submit your complaints to your MP, and probably to the airport manager at the appropriate airport, and probably to the Chairman of The Transport Select Committee.

[Firestorm]

Pilots are notoriously spineless as a group. We are all intelligent and reasonably educated, and well capable of putting together an accurate and well constructed report of an incident at staff search, so do it! We can help ourselves, and should do so instead of waiting for someone to do it for us in which case it won't happen. Ever.

I've said more than enough here, so will not be taking further part in this 'discussion', but am going to spend my time writing letters to those who can help the situation.

[old,not bold]

Firestorm

It's not much use making these posts here on PprunePerhaps you should follow your own advice.......





Edit; Sorry, I see you propose to do that, from your last post. That's nice. Good Luck. If you had read the thread you may have seen that other people had said much the same thing. But who am I to comment, I do long, boring off-the-point posts, usually called rants, too.

[lotman1000]

Firestorm, if you like I'll give you some tips on publicity, eg getting someone to get a letter printed in the Times (see this thread, as per previous suggestion that you should read it).

[tribekey]

Sf guy


You ( and everyone else reading this) may or may not be aware that the regulations are also causing problems for air traffic control staff too. Again, the regulations seem to be enforced/interpreted differently depending which airport you are at. Some control towers are not 'airside' so the problem doesn't exist, some are provided with liquids by their employers (milk deliveries for example can be done by a 'deemed safe 'person). My particular experience is that no liquids/butter/yoghurts etc are allowed airside and therefore i am currently expected to work up to 9 hours with only water to drink. (this would be on a night shift- during the day we are currently told we can go to the airport terminal to buy a drink thus using the greater portion of our mandatory rest break to get a drink!).

The system has thrown up so many ridiculous irregularities and contradictions at my particular airport you simply wouldn't believe it.

Anyway, my full support as a uk ATCO to all the air crews, ground crews etc who have to put up with this nonsense, and i will be writing to my m.p. transport select commitee etc.

One last thought; current regulations would allow myself, working entirely on my own on a night shift (no assistant etc) to control several passenger aircraft departing xxxx early in the morning( after having only water supplied to drink all night),maybe coinciding with a pilot/air crew who've just gone through 'security' and feeling a little stressed. The passengers have had their liquids checked etc but are loaded up with stuff they've bought airside that simply has been delivered off a lorry straight into the airside shops without being checked.

Happy days

[WHBM]

My particular experience is that no liquids/butter/yoghurts etc are allowed airside and therefore i am currently expected to work up to 9 hours with only water to drink.
Can someone please explain why this situation persists when "duty free" shops and restaurants which are airside can bound along business as usual, raking in some of the highest margins in retail and catering for the airport operator (and of course pax can take such purchased items right inside the aircraft with them), but that same operator will not allow these items to be taken in by ATC personnel (read no profit margin for the airport operator).

Security concerns my posterior.

[help me]

sense is clearly not common in security..

[CONF iture]

sooooooooo secure ... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Keo2TR1Zouw)

[Funnel Cloud]

I've also always wondered why a guy working for Pret a Manger for example, is considered safe enough to bring 50 bottles of water and coke through the same security checkpoint as where they take 1 bottle of water away from an airline captain.
When asking the security officer about it, they respond with "these bottles come from a secure location". At my airport, this is so untrue, cause whenever I walk to the terminal, stacks of bottles are parked near the lifts underneath the terminal building and anyone (no ID needed, landside) can take them. And besides that, security claims that I as a captain could have interfered with my water bottle, but apparently somebody from a sandwich shop could never do that???? :uhoh:
I wish I got the respect of a bar tender when I go to work... :{

[Blackball]

I have been told that the Security staff at Edinburgh now have to search all Flight Crew when they arrive from abroad as they no longer trust "Foriegn" secuity. This only applies if the crew concerned wish to remain "Airside" for any reason.
Can anyone throw any light on this? Are we in the UK becomming paranoid?

[Final 3 Greens]

As a pax, I had to go through search when arriving at and departing from LGW on connecting international flights.

Then again, I've had to do the same at DXB, FRA, ZRH and other major airports.

[Harry Ramsden]

Blackball, Yes you are right. When we come back from Europe, after we leave the aircraft we clear customs which takes us off airside. We then have to go through the monkeys on staff search to go airside again to get to the crewroom in order to complete post flight duties! Utter farce. The only light I can shed on it is that it is jobs for the boys!:ugh:

Final 3 greens, we have to put with this nonsense everyday, your lucky you are a passenger.

[Final 3 Greens]

Harry

Not that it will make you feel any better, but I have to put up with it about 120 times per year, which is bad enough.

And we don't have an expedited channel like crew members often do. Yes, there is "Fast Track", but that took 25 minutes last Wednesday evening at LHR - should be against the Trade Descriptions Act :ugh:

[missioncontrol]

I watched a refueller being frisked by a security agent under the wing of a Delta Airlines 767, which was parked on stand 4 yesterday morning.

Is this some local arrangement "Delta" have with their refuellers at Edinburgh?

Also what were they actually hoping to achieve, with the refuelling bowser actually parked under the wing and the hose connected, at the point the refueller was frisked by the security chappie?:D

[Nil further]

Re EDI security
No surprise there ,of all the places all over the world i have worked these guys get the award as a uniquely beligerent bunch of goons , none of this has anything to do with security, when will the public wake up and realise that they are paying for this nonsense .
Superb letter in the (Glasgow) Herald today from a GLA based CPT about the confiscation of his tabasco sauce.Sorry im not very techy so cant post a link !

BAA airport "security" directors had better wake up soon and realise that they are at risk of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.I have travelled a lot as a passenger lately and the entire airport experience is one entire ghastly , stressful unneccesary mess .Our customers will soon migrate to other modes of transport if this keeps up.

"security" is a catch all excuse for levying higher fees and little hitlers to go about massaging their egos ."its your security" no it isnt .My security would be greatly enhanced if we targeted the guys climbing over the fence setting fire to parked aircraft , how many grannies were being frisked at GLA whlist that little number took place ?

Get real folks or you will have us all out of a job .

I do not want special treatment , just a modicum of common sense and profesional courtesy please !

ps. i do not envy the staff at the business end trying to impliment ever stranger regimens , buy and large they do a good job of wading through all the nonsense from above .

[Sinbad_633]

Here you go....

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/letters/display.var.1414984.0.its_time_for_airport_security_to_ketch up_with_reality.php

[SISOSIG]

What an excellent letter - well done that man :D

[ABO944]

:D Nice letter !!

I got through EDI staff search twice last week with a bottle of water in my flight bag ! Didn't realise it was in there 'til I was on the aircraft!

[Blackball]

The interesting thing is that there is no rebutal from the BAA over these fiascos.
It almost makes one believe that there must be truth in these articles. I know itsot politically correct to harp back to 1939, but I don't recall from the history books that the Gestapo took such draconian measures.
It really is pleasant to be living in Blairs/Brown's "Third Reich".

[Symbian]

Interesting to see what is been said about GLA goons as came across one today who didn’t seem to understand English i.e. I asked that he use the electric wand which I prefer to a groping by hand. For some reason he took exception to this as I heard him say as I was walking away some people are unbelievable! Now what on earth do you think his problem was with a request that was made in a polite manner?

I guess it must just be a case of pay peanuts get monkeys and I apologise to all monkeys for using that analogy.

He also honestly felt that he was doing some good by searching me as he said you can’t be too safe. I didn’t even bother to explain the futility of his actions as one needs a brain to comprehend.

[BEARO]

Passed through LDY last Saturday morning. Not a usual stop for our airline so we were unaware of the utter nonsense that awaited us.

There is no designated staff security so we went through pax search. I went through first and my bags were screened. No problem. FO and Cabin Crew were told that their baggage would have to go down the belt at check in and they could collect it themselves once airside. They could not bring any of their baggage through pax screening because they contained cosmetics, shampoo etc.

Bear in mind that my baggage also contained toiletries from our night stop and was screened by same goon that insisted other members of my crew return to check in. I brought to there attention the fact that my bags was also full of 'hazardous materials' to which I received what sounded like a grunt and a shrug of a shoulder.

I was fuming at this stage and made my feelings known to both grunters and shoulder shruggers alike. When the crew returned from check in they were then further insulted by being asked to wear a high vis jacket before proceeding airside. You guessed it......high vis jackets had just been checked in. :ugh:

When we finally made it outside to the ramp it was pissing with rain and after collecting their bags we all arrived at the aircraft seething and not in the correct frame of mind to perform the five sector day that lay ahead of us.

I believe Logan Air crews tolerate this BS on a regular basis in LDY and would greatly appreciate any input.

The Bear.

[llondel]

“The real fear is that, one day two or three of these might sneak through the net in different bags. The assailants could then meet up on the aircraft and make a fruit cocktail”

On a more serious note, this is indeed the hole in the whole liquids through security thing, but to point it out to the :mad: in charge of the security empire would probably result in a total liquid ban again.

I wonder what would happen if someone got a bunch of 125ml containers, had some labels printed that looked like the originals but said 100ml on them? I've not yet seen a bucket of water at security to check actual volumes yet.

[SKI]

The best way to deal with this is simple, select a date begining of the school summer holidays is a goody, ALL airside airport employees not just pilots, to have a couple of days off!!!!!!! then you would see some real chaos!....if only every one would do it?????????????

[Jay Arr]

Guys, I asked the question before but got no real answer: anyone figure out a way for foreign aircrew to sign this e-petition? As it stands, only UK residents and/citizens can sign. Presumably continental Europeans cannot. Australian pilots (me) flying into LHR cannot. And I want to - the insane UK security affects us all.

Ideas, anyone?

[BusyB]

Just click the expat offering and put an overseas address.:}

[Jet A1]

I understand its the DFT who are making the rules and that these "operatives" are following orders but why they have to treat us like 5 year olds each morning has reached a head with me now. It's like a running battle and I'm fed up of the stress and hassle every single day I go through the security channels to do my job.

Up here at MAN they are now bringing in mandatory trials of Iris recognition for access airside. Since I have got an airside ID - is this now worthless - where will it end ?

I'm fed up...

[forget]

Jay Arr’s got a good point but Mike’s novel idea wouldn’t be used by many non UK pilots. Isn’t there someone, on the Computer Forum perhaps, who could produce an independent (and properly worded) Petition where non UK pilots can have their say. This could then be formally presented to Downing Street, maybe by IFALPA, with a demand that it be made part of the UK Petition. Anyone?

[Jay Arr]

Yes guys, for any petition to be taken seriously and respected, people must use genuine names and addresses. Won't be credible otherwise and could actually work against the intent.

Mods - do you have the necessary software tools within this bulletin board to create such a petition? You will surely get a lot of foreign signatures.

Why in hell are 100% of crew at LHR required to remove shoes, whilst only a random selection of pax have to?

[ZFT]

Please make sure you find the correct MP/MSP/MWA to send your letter to. Not sure of the situation in Wales, but certainly in Scotland you are represented by not just your constituency MP but a group of proportional representation MSPs. Write to ALL OF THEM! Its easy with email!



Retread 7

The problem is, from previous experiences they are either cannot read English or are too busy on a tax payers, all expenses paid junket to take note let alone respond. (Certainly my ex MP Laura Moffett falls into this category).

[Tight Seat]

Isn't the human body made up of 70% water?

By my calculations I'm getting away with 57l of liquids everytime I go to work.;)

[wiggy]

Rainboe
Yep, two of our female crew members were subjected to a "intimate" search a couple of days back - I suspect because DfT were checking the checkers.
Sadly our Delay at the aircraft due to Security was buried by late loading. FWIW the CSD filed a report.

[Symbian]

If your CC were inappropriately touched it is indecent assault call for the police and press charges especially if there were witnesses. It may not end in court but the goons may think twice next time around. The longer we don’t take action the worst it is going to get!

[stellair]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/airside/

Nice letter sinbad :D

[TFlyguy]

Re LGW crew search............

In South Terminal many crews indeed do take their suitcases through security and if anything is noticed as being "unacceptable" one is just asked to confirm its "going in the hold" and away you go!

[ZeBedie]

Exactly where are security allowed to put their hands when frisking us? There must be some rules. Does anyone know?

[Flyit Pointit Sortit]

depends on wether or not they're wearing rubber gloves!!! :ooh::ooh::ooh:

[Symbian]

They are not allowed to touch you in sensitive areas i.e. the family jewels including baby’s lunch for the lady’s. If they do it is indecent assault for which they can be charged. Of course it is very difficult to prove one on one so it is always a good idea to have witnesses, If they do touch you then make sure your jump for the CCTV:)

[A and C]

Following the recent CHIRP issue that had a number of "security" inccidents reported I emailed CHIRP suporting the stand that they are taking and pointing out that I personaly had at one time or another been treated in the same way.

I have also become aware that at some (and I stress some) airports it has become a "sport" with security giving pilots and particularly captains a hard time.

Have you all seen the notices posted at security about abuse of the staff?
Well this cuts both ways and if you feel that you have been abused you should report it but NOT to the security management.

I have reported inccidents to them and all they do is brush it under the carpet, it took the BAA four months to reply to me following a what I regarded as sexual type inccident of "over searching".

The security complaint system is loaded in the favour of the airport authoritys and gives you no rights what so ever so the only recourse that staff have is to call the police.

I pointed this out to the people at CHIRP and they are going to take up the issue with the DfT at a higher level this time, I am told that CHIRP have recived a lot of letters on the security issue and seem to be the only people who are at the moment taking the flight safety issues that this new "security" has raised seriously.

[tonyflaire]

I think we should all wear flip flops through security on a predetermined day.
Perhaps we can get the media involved as they would love the story and it would high light what nonesense we have to go through. The press and TV would love it.

The hands we use to control the aircraft are the most dangerous weapons we have. we don't need guns , liquids, etc, but its all a matter of trust. We are trusted to operate the aircraft. WE ARE TRUSTED TO OPERATE THE AIRCRAFT IN A SAFE AND SECURE MANNER.

We don't need some minister in some whitehall office dictating how all crew are searched.