Potential Security Weakness?

[Mariner1]

Is this a weakness in security procedure, or was the correct procedure not followed...?

I was on a flight travelling from Manchester, UK to Amsterdam a week ago. We were on the runway in Manchester (A319) awaiting the doors being closed, then one of the passengers alerted the stewardess and said that she needs to get off the plane and can't fly.

The passenger was allowed to get off, then the stewardess came down the aisle of the full plane and, one by one, took out each bag in the overhead bins and asked the passengers to identify it as theirs. This went one for quite some time as some passengers had headphones on and where not really paying attention. Once she was satisfied that all the bags in the overhead bins had been identified as theirs by one of the passengers on the plane, we took off and had an uneventful short flight over to Amsterdam.

So, is this acceptable practice?

What about if this passenger gets on the plane with something illegal in their pocket, (e.g. drugs), and puts them in someone else's (distinctive, bright red) bag whist it's up in the overhead bin? They then text their friend at the destination airport and ask them to look out for the passenger coming through arrivals with the bright red bag as the drugs are in there.

Did this UK 'budget' airline just skip procedure in order to stick to their schedule, or is this actually a loophole we have here?

[davidjohnson6]

Just my random thoughts...

One presumes that all passengers boarding the flight along with their bags would have gone through some form of standardised screening to cross from landside to airside. This would have likely picked up some offending items ?

Furthermore, assuming all passengers' hand luggage is screened in close proximity to the passengers when going through security, it would be fairly easy to match anything naughty to the passenger involved, if necessary by reference to a CCTV recording of said passenger in the screening area.

I'm therefore a little puzzled as to how strict procedures should be in the example you mentioned - perhaps you could clarify ?
Furthermore, how long for example would other passengers tolerate being delayed by security checks before they too also decided to abandon their trip ?

Yes, you could make the overall security process more strict and remove the capacity to smuggle even small amounts of drugs, but what is the aim of the security process, and how invasive a screening process will the general population accept if it is to be applied to everyone rather than just those of special interest ? As an absolute extreme, if all passengers had to undergo a body cavity search to enter an airport, would foreign tourists / businesspeople still choose to visit us ?

[fa2fi]

Low cost bashing by the looks of it. If it happened on BA you wouldn't think twice. I had it when I was crew. A guy couldn't travel as we were held up for the weather.

He left and we did the same process, checking the seat pockets near h under the seats and under the seat cushion. Knowing that all pax were security screened meant this is sufficient and no risk posed.

To be honest one could slip drugs in to a fellow passengers bag and one could still fly. All you need to do is get a friend to stop them as you say, or stop them yourself once you are through customs.

Also I very much doubt you were on the runway with the doors open and planes haven't had 'stewardesses' on them for years. These basic errors are pointing me to you being a troll or a DM reporter fishing (who love any kind of easyJet bashing for their rag).

[Basil]

planes haven't had 'stewardesses' on them for years
Deffo had some last week on BA16 :p

[PAXboy]

If a pax states they cannot travel and gives every indication that they will be disruptive - then the a/c will return to the gate - or a remote stand.

If the pax had had checked baggage THEN you would have seen process!

Welcome aboard Mariner1 :p

[Bealzebub]

What about if this passenger gets on the plane with something illegal in their pocket, (e.g. drugs), and puts them in someone else's (distinctive, bright red) bag whist it's up in the overhead bin? They then text their friend at the destination airport and ask them to look out for the passenger coming through arrivals with the bright red bag as the drugs are in there.

On the hypothesis that they were going to do this, why would it make any difference if they stayed on the aircraft or got off?

We were on the runway in Manchester (A319) awaiting the doors being closed

That would be a bigger concern! You mean the apron. The runway is the long strip of concrete that is used for take off and landing.

[Torque Tonight]

What you saw was a security process in action. The flaw or security loophole would have been if this didn't happen - but it did, so there is no problem. All luggage in the aircraft cabin and hold has been screened. For whatever reason a passenger has to get off the aircraft. This process (which is a PITA for the crew and will almost certainly cause a delay) ensures that the passenger does not leave anything behind and all luggage in the aircraft is accounted for. Any checked luggage in the hold would also have been removed.

If there is a whiff of loco bashing here, in my experience some of the locos run a far tighter ship than some of the legacies.

Out of interest Mariner, what would be necesary to satisfy you under these circumstances? Serious question. (Forcing the passenger to travel isn't a viable answer).

[ExXB]

Smuggling doesn't endanger the aircraft or the passengers. This hypothetical problem isn't a security issue, that's for law enforcement.

[Rawtenstall]

On the subject of Manchester security, I was made to feel like a naughty schoolboy at the weekend for being in the departures lounge without my biometrics being taken. Flying LAX to IOM via LHR and MAN. My biometrics had been captured at LHR an hour earlier but the security guard at the entrance to the gate 14x corridor in T3 made me stand in the corner whilst he dealt with the rest of the queue and made out that I had done something wrong and somehow evaded security.

My crime? Getting off the flight from LHR and walking into the departures lounge by following the signage for T3 departures.

I had already had biometrics taken at LHR T5 transfer desk so thought nothing of it until my Flybe boarding pass refused to let me through the automated gate.

If there is a biometric loophole at T3 then fix it, but dont take it out on your passengers by embarrassing them at the gate :=

[Gulfstreamaviator]

Biometics, is that like a Greek Yogurt.....

[Agaricus bisporus]

I'm left wondering how your "biometrics" (whatever they are...) had escaped. Did they evade capture for long?

[DaveReidUK]

Did they evade capture for long?

I would imagine they were eyeballed by someone sooner or later.

[Piltdown Man]

Mariner1 - what you describe is very reasonable and I believe fully compliant. The job of security screening is to detect threats to the safety of the aircraft. It is not there to stop smuggling. But there was a loophole. A big one. The crew! For sure they won't be carrying pointy sticks, vicious yoghurts or WMDs but with few exceptions, nobody ever checks to make sure that the correct personnel (face/name/time/pass details) pass by the lovely people at security. A la 9/11, the aircraft becomes the weapon and the system allows it to happen.

[ExXB]

No response by the OP. Perhaps we should ignore him/her as a potential troll.

[MG23]

But there was a loophole. A big one. The crew! For sure they won't be carrying pointy sticks, vicious yoghurts or WMDs but with few exceptions, nobody ever checks to make sure that the correct personnel (face/name/time/pass details) pass by the lovely people at security.

That's a good point. Passengers should be allowed to check flight crew ID before we let them on the plane :).

[RedhillPhil]

This baggage matching or "baggage reconciliation" as it's termed is the same procedure for last-minute non-travelling Eurostar passengers.

[Mariner1]

Thanks for all the responses. I guess, having read the contributions to this thread, that this isn't a security vulnerability (unless a new explosive thread is currently able to pass through undetected), but more like a smuggling loophole; more a law enforcement issue.

I'm just a nervous flyer (and flying on a regular basis hasn't cured me), so my mind tends to work overtime once I've entered the plane.

[businessair75]

What was carried out on this flight (presumably Easyjet) is exactly the procedure at an airline I used to work for, it is probably a procedure (like many regs) that is set out by the CAA. I.e search the immediate area and confirm who's bags belongs to who.

I think the OP was letting his/her imagination run riot regarding the whole 'drugs in a distinctive red bag' scenario which could easily be done whilst the pax still travels, spends the weekend in Amsterdam, travels around Europe in the dead of night and culminating in them committing murder on the Orient Express. Hercule Poirot indeed.

It is important to remember that regardless of commercial pressure the vast majority of airlines want the operation to be safe and secure and the overwhelming majority of crew (flight and cabin) will not neglect safety and security to save a few minutes and certainly not to put their own safety in jeopardy.

A friend of mine works for another loco and by all accounts safety and security is always taken to the extreme, almost verging on being anal in his own opinion. So if it is a 'budget bash' then that is unfortunate.

On the subject of Manchester security, I was made to feel like a naughty schoolboy at the weekend for being in the departures lounge without my biometrics being taken. Flying LAX to IOM via LHR and MAN. My biometrics had been captured at LHR an hour earlier but the security guard at the entrance to the gate 14x corridor in T3 made me stand in the corner whilst he dealt with the rest of the queue and made out that I had done something wrong and somehow evaded security.


What did you expect him to do? Fall at your feet begging for forgiveness whilst deploying a pop up sofa and finger buffet whilst you waited?

[Dairyground]

On the subject of Manchester security, I was made to feel like a naughty schoolboy at the weekend for being in the departures lounge without my biometrics being taken. Flying LAX to IOM via LHR and MAN. My biometrics had been captured at LHR an hour earlier but the security guard at the entrance to the gate 14x corridor in T3 made me stand in the corner whilst he dealt with the rest of the queue and made out that I had done something wrong and somehow evaded security.

My crime? Getting off the flight from LHR and walking into the departures lounge by following the signage for T3 departures.

I had already had biometrics taken at LHR T5 transfer desk so thought nothing of it until my Flybe boarding pass refused to let me through the automated gate.

If there is a biometric loophole at T3 then fix it, but dont take it out on your passengers by embarrassing them at the gate


Part of the OP's problem is is that the photograph (and it's probably just a photograph) taken in Heathrow T5 is used only in T5 to ensure that the person leaving on a domestic flight is legitimately in the UK. The idea is to avoid the situation where a transit passenger not allowed into the UK swaps boarding passes with a friend who is allowed in and does not mind a brief trip overseas. Heathrow Airport Ltd and possibly the airlines prefer this system to providing separate domestic and international departure lounges.

The same scheme has been introduced in Manchester T3 in the past few months, presumably because some international transit passengers can avoid contact with UK Immigration.

What i don't understand is how the OP got into T3 Departures without being photographed again. I don't recall seeing any signs anywhere on the T3 domestic arrivals path indicating a route into T3 departures anywhere before baggage claim.