The Naked Airline Traveller

[strake]

..with apologies to Quentin Crisp..

A report from the BBC below on the installation of another trial whole bdy scanner, this time in Manchester.
So the question to the panel is, which is preferable, no more pat-downs/undressing or a picture of the perfect PPruner sent to an airport security employee for his/her delectation?

BBC NEWS | UK | 'Naked' scanner in airport trial (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8303983.stm)

[Xeque]

I saw the BBC report. It would seem that the person viewing the images sees a lot less than one can see on some Greek holiday beaches. I for one wouldn't have any problem with someone seeing my bits amongst thousands of other peoples bits just as long as I can get from check-in to departure gate in the minimum amount of time and without some drongo upsetting me.

[PAXboy]

strake I see why you might post it but it's standard Daily Mail reporting. For those of us (such as yourself) this topic is old, old history. The American military already use this and, I understand, have it set to 'max' and all soft tissue is visible. IIRC (off the top of my head without reading the article) the stated intention for the domestic versions are they are locked to a lower level and the person viewing the image is in a separate location (perhaps 200m away) and notify the local attendants to give a pat down or not. That is, the operator viewing the image, cannot look around the end of the machine and directly see the person they have just scanned. Will images 'leak' out into the web? I'm sure they already have done as these scanners are running elsewhere in the world.

To answer your question: Who gives a monkey's? The operator might think it amusing (or more) for the first half hour but then it will be as boring as the x-ray of bags scanner.

[sea oxen]

Daily Mail reporting

:D

They did give Baroness Scotland, though.

Ah- do they look at children as well? Not quite sure what to make of that when people can't take photographs of their own children nowadays.

SO
Edited to say that this topic is floating around in JB. As it's not something over which we have any choice, and owing to its salacious potential, I suspect that's where this thread is going.

[deltahotel]

Not sure where this will go. When I first saw this a few years ago doing security training I was amazed at how intrusive it is. Last time it was discussed we were told that the intention would be to overlay the scan results (without the real soft tissue stuff) onto an androgynous body shape. Have no idea what the progress on this is.

[ConstantFlyer]

This scanner may well stop a person with evil intent - and concealed explosives or weapons - from getting onto an aircraft; but it won't do anything to stop a suicide bomber from killing hundreds of people packed into long snaking queues waiting to go through an airport's security search area. Surely intelligence and profiling would be more effective? To be a deterrent, security doesn't need to be visible; people just need to know it's there.

[bottle]

maybe not but it would have some chance of detecting wanted male terrorist suspects from leaving the country dressed from head to foot in black looking through a slot pretending to be female

[clareprop]

sea oxen,

Ah- do they look at children as well? Not quite sure what to make of that when people can't take photographs of their own children nowadays.


It would appear that they have just asked themselves that question..maybe they read your comment:p

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Manchester | Airport stops scans on children (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/8313335.stm)

[Blue Rotor Ronin]

That's idiotic. How long is it going to take terrorists to work out they just need to recruit and indoctrinate the under 18's.:ugh:

[LurkerBelow]

This could turn into an interesting debate:
Stopping potential pedophiles getting work as airport security screeners vs the need to stop terrorists boarding aircraft with explosive components.

I just hope someone has some common sense (as if ...)

[1station]

Bottle - It would not stop male terrorist suspects dressed head to toe in black pretending to be women if the operator has no view of the subject being scanned :ugh:

[MidmarMile]

1station - Cross dressing isn't in itself a threat, it's what is hidden that is the threat. Anything hidden should be detected, thus eliminating the threat.

[1station]

MidmarMile - I am fully aware of that I was merely replying to an earlier post by Bottle.

[Carrier]

Security staff at Manchester Airport have been banned from using new "see-through" security scanners on passengers aged under 18.
The full-body scans, unveiled earlier this month in Terminal 2, are aimed at revealing hidden weapons or explosives, but also show people's bodies.
A civil rights group believes the scans could breach laws protecting children
The scans have been temporarily stopped for young people while legal advice is sought, said the airport.
Action on Rights for Childen (Arch) claim the Rapiscan equipment could break the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image of a child.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Manchester | Airport stops scans on children (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/8313335.stm)

There also are privacy rights issues for those over 18.

There have been plenty of children used as suicide bombers.

What a job for a pervert!

If it is illegal then all those involved in implementing and operating it should be charged. It would be great to see the security nazis get a taste of their own medicine just like that well known convict Baroness Scotland.

[call100]

All utter b0440cks......falling into the UK paranoia about paedophiles, this dictates that all people are paedophiles.
If people think someone is going to get turned on by the blurred images in a remote location then that says more about them than anything else.
A security guard in a remote location is looking at 3 second scans of hundreds of thousands of people. The pressures of not missing anything in fear of losing their jobs would not give the opportunities that those against the system imagine.
People on these forums have been complaining constantly because they go through the occasional search, now something comes along to speed it up and still the moans. Personally if it eases the working day then great, if there are perverts employed on security then I'd rather they be looking at an unidentifiable blur than running their hands over me.
If we must live with the over reaction of Security then lets make it easier all round.

[fat'n'grey]

Give pax an option. Either body-scan or get half undressed; belt, wallet, overcoat, jacket, shoes, pocket change, metal bracelet watch, go through x-ray and then get dressed again. Which would you choose?

Body-scan was on trial at Heathrow 1-2 years ago. Every week when I travelled I would try to get the body scan. Trouble was, the great travelling public saw how much quicker/easier it was and so they all chose that! Consequently the body scanner was swamped and I generally had to go through the undressing/dressing malarkey.

Body scan will be accepted very quickly if offered.

Oh dear!

[Malone]

It is not designed to catch terrorist suspects escaping the country, it is designed to stop them carrying out their attacks! :ugh:
We need the Government to review border controls to include exiting passengers to close that loophole. Fat chance of that though!!:(

[MidmarMile]

It can happen to us all...

I regularly fly to Durban (from Johannesburg) & return the same day. About 6 months ago I went through security at JNB boarded and flew to DUR. Spent a long day working and rushed back to the airport to catch my homeward flight. I cut it quite fine (pun intended!) as I had my boarding pass and had no luggage to check in. Got to security took my laptop out its bag, walked through, was frisked down, got my laptop, but the bag had gone absent. Then I was asked if the bag was mine and informed that there was a leatherman in it. Sure enough I found my Leatherma wave in the side pocket. There was no time to check it in (not that it would have got to JNB anyway) so I had to put it in the large disposal bin!!

No system is 100% perfect, but we should be able to place a high level of reliance on it.