CX Pilot arrested at Heathrow for possession of knives

[Basil]

Pilot arrested at Heathrow for possession of knives | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/19/pilot-arrested-heathrow-possession-knives-cathay-pacific-hong-kong)

A spokesperson for the Metropolitan police said they were called to a staff search area at Heathrow at around 9.10pm on Saturday and found a member of a flight crew in possession of knives. “Officers attended and subsequently a member of the flight crew, a man, was arrested on suspicion of possession of an offensive weapon in a public place and possession of a knife blade / sharp pointed article in a public place.

Hmm, those security chaps still haven't worked out that a pilot doesn't need a knife to crash an aircraft.

[TunaBum]

Seems like its got nothing to do with flying/crashing an aircraft. Just possession of a concealed weapon - plane and simple.....;)

[Shep69]

Concealed weapon ? Really ?!!?

[cxorcist]

Thank goodness they caught him. It's not like he has unfettered access to a crowbar and the total trust of unsuspecting crew and passengers. A knife (or knives) totally changes the equation. Well done Heathrow!

[cxorcist]

Wait a second! That's not part of contract compliance! Maybe the LHR boys are more upset than previously thought about three man Europe. Is this illegal self help or was there a secret strike ballot authorizing carriage of weapons?

[TunaBum]

Concealed weapon ? Really ?!!?


well if he was waving a knife around I'd expect a different reaction/outcome .....

[RHEINHARD]

All joking aside if this is proven true he's a bloody idiot and will bring down a whole raft of pain on the rest of us. Transitting the security process at LHR, with the ferrets dressed in their SS Panzer Gruppe uniforms is onerous enough. It's surely going to get worse now. Just check the bloody things in; even if it's something as innocuous as a cheese knife this incident has no doubt made some jobsworths' day. And we don't need the extra attention on our profession right now.

[Toruk Macto]

Friend of mine was stopped by Chinese security when they spotted a fishing knife in his overnight bag , had been on fishing trip in Aus and forgot about it . He explained , said his fault and they just threw it in bin and wished him a safe flight .

[Yonosoy Marinero]

I'm fairly certain the concerned individual wasn't dumb enough to have tried this. Not in LHR... At least I hope.

It's most likely a case of a forgotten item in the bag, or even a metal knife from the meal tray (those you couldn't cut mint jelly with) which slipped and fell in the flight bag.

Still, thanks to the greatest airport security team of them all for saving the day from this obviously dangerous maniac...
:hmm:

said his fault and they just threw it in bin and wished him a safe flight .

That's fine and dandy in a place where logic and common sense have any degree of existence. This is LHR staff security we're talking about. The ones taking your bag apart to confiscate and scold you about the deadly >125ml tube of toothpaste you nefariously tried to bring onboard while waving turban wearing ramp staff right through.

[Exascot]

.....possession of an offensive weapon in a public place and possession of a knife blade / sharp pointed article in a public place.

Excuse me but I wear a Leatherman on my belt about 360 days a year. So would this be an offence in the UK?

I obviously do not go through airport security with it. However, it has a been a pretty close call on a couple of occasions when locally flying here. I would just apologise and give it to the handling agent to walk it around security :cool:

[PURPLE PITOT]

Exascot, that could get you jail time in the UK. It's gone mad.

[Basil]

A few years ago, at Glasgow, I checked the suitcase, passed through security and went to the gate.
We didn't get on so, for some reason, had to go back and reclaim suitcase before checking in again.
Second time through security they found the Swiss Army knife which had, inadvertently, been in my handbaggage all the time. Security guy apologised for confiscating it. All over in seconds; no police involvement and off we went.

[PURPLE PITOT]

Working on a corporate jet now, i leave my swisstool in the cockpit, but i leave the holster on my belt.

Drives the gestapo insane!:ooh:

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Excuse me but I wear a Leatherman on my belt about 360 days a year. So would this be an offence in the UK?

I obviously do not go through airport security with it. However, it has a been a pretty close call on a couple of occasions when locally flying here. I would just apologise and give it to the handling agent to walk it around security :cool:

Only because it's got a locking blade. You'll be alright with a pen knife.

[Pucka]

Working on a corporate jet now, i leave my swisstool in the cockpit, but i leave the holster on my belt.

Drives the gestapo insane!:ooh:....good one..think I'll try that myself!!!maybe get a leather man top section just to make it more authentic!!

[doubletap]

Best get rid of that fire axe on the flightdeck then.....:=

[joebanana]

Offensive Weapons Information (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/186911/Knives_and_offensive_weapons_information_GDS_FAQ.pdf)

Sections 139 and 139A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 apply to any article which has a blade or point except a folding pocketknife unless the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 7.62 centimetres (3 inches).

The maximum penalty for these offences is a prison sentence of four years, or a fine, or both.

[bufe01]

We are talking LHR here, you don't want to get caught with the terrible 20 by 25 cm OVERSIZE clear plastic bag !

[Left Luggage]

Cathay Pacific pilot arrested over Heathrow knives find - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32378682)


Thread already running here >>> http://www.pprune.org/fragrant-harbour/560133-cx-pilot-arrested-heathrow-possession-knives.html

[4Greens]

Just heard on the BBC midday news that a Cathay Pilot was arrested yesterday charged with carrying a knife. He is now released on bail.

[Steve the Pirate]

I must say, I'm a little surprised by the indignation shown in some of these posts that the pilot was not at fault. I don't know why the article in question was in his luggage but the fact that security found it and acted, probably according to their SOP, should be applauded rather than scoffed at, IMHO. Or should we expect security staff to exercise discretion when it's us?

[Basil]

Steve, I don't think pilots should be let off - if, indeed, the item did fall within the banned size range.

Working for a B757 operator, we did our own engine oil check and replenishment. I had a flat screwdriver with the blade ground to fit nicely in the RD211 cowl flap. One day I was challenged by security but, when I explained, they let it through. I guess they could have confiscated it but they were sensible chaps.

[MrSnuggles]

Of course they should arrest him, throw him to the vultures!

It's not like he has an entire plane to crash into the nearest mountain if he wants to.... oh wait, that was done already....

(The irony is strong with this one...)

[geh065]

There is a lot more to this than meets the eye. The media is only telling half the story.

[darkroomsource]

I think this is not about airport security.
The offences he was charged with by the police have nothing to do with airport security, but rather concealed weapons laws from 1953 and 1988.
If this makes it through court then the weapons he had are not a simple folding knife, or even something like a leatherman's tool.
Having moved to the UK recently, after living most of my life in the USA, I was a bit surprised to hear about "knife laws", so I read up on them, here's the best link I've found:
UK Knife Law- What you need to Know (http://www.polarisbushcraft.co.uk/bushcraft-articles/uk-knife-law--what-you-need-to-know)

Basically, if you have a reason to have a pocket knife, you're OK, but if you're carrying something that was clearly designed to inflict injury, you're going to jail.

[deptrai]

probably according to their SOP, should be applauded rather than scoffed at, IMHO

Among the countless things I have carried through security unharmed, before and thankfully also post 9/11, were 2 knives with rather large blades, handmade by my grandfather, polished lacquered hardwood, inlaid with gold, I carried them around because I had just sent a container with all my belongings to a new base, and only kept what I deemed irreplaceable, family hairlooms, without thinking that it were knives (yes I was stressed and really didn't think). The security guy at [insert asian airport here, the kind of people who strictly follow procedures, and only care about face and other evil things] laughed out loud, and kept laughing all the way while he accompanied me, to let me put them in the hold. Maybe he exercised discretion, and in my humble opinion, he was a good guy, and he/she should be empowered to exercise that discretion with passengers, whether they are children who accidentally bring their liquid cough syrup, or heads of state (discretion is encouraged for them on flag carriers usually), or pilots who bring some silly yoghurt their better half wants them to eat to combat flatulence (been there done that). I can't see any evil in exercising discretion and making a judgement. For me, it's the kind of thing that makes my day, when someone goes the extra mile, and thinks while applying SOPs. That never brought an aircraft down. I'm not applauding the arrest of a pilot who carried some knife for now, until I know more details.

[Shep69]

STP--I'm scoffing. A lot.

Even the US TSA--which is rightfully scoffed at from time to time--has some reasonability factor. A simple 'oops,' "please take away whatever I can't be trusted with" look into the situation a bit and press.

The irony of the mindless drones grabbing tools is priceless. And the tabloids lost no time in bringing up the German thing; something which has no relevance or connection whatsoever.

There are plenty of things which will always be present on any aircraft forever which can be used as a weapon if desired by a miscreant (or even a good guy defending against a miscreant)--as (if not more) effective than a knife or 'sharp object.' So throwing a pilot in jail--the same guy that would be FLYING the airplane--is silly. We used to carry our leathermans all the time; something that is sorely missed when a minor repair is needed.

In fact, in his excellent book "Fate is the Hunter" E.K. Gann refers to firearms that commercial pilots were required to carry when transporting the mail in the DC-3 days. Seems that people with responsibility were more trusted with tools and sharp objects not all that long ago. And there were good guys and bad guys then too.

Seems like the world I used to know went insane when I wasn't paying attention.

[Oval3Holer]

Let's not overlook the pathetic fact that Cathay Pacific doesn't even have a pilot on reserve at its largest European base!

[papershuffler]

I've mentioned this before but...

I was flying regularly after September 11, short & long haul from LHR, LGW, MAN and BHX.

Most times I wore my hair up. The beak hair clip I used was 5-6 inches long, solid metal, pointed, and serrated. Similar to this, but plain and the 'blades' were serrated.

http://i01.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/726/010/423/423010726_402.jpg

In summary, what equates to two knives, hinged together.

Not once was it spotted or queried. Not. Once.
It didn't even set the metal detectors off. How?

I saw other women wearing similar clips, and I think I recall seeing them for sale airside too. It made a mockery of all the 'security precautions' that you could waltz through with something like that.:ugh:

[Steve the Pirate]

@Shep69

Even the US TSA--which is rightfully scoffed at from time to time--has some reasonability factor. A simple 'oops,' "please take away whatever I can't be trusted with" look into the situation a bit and press.

So would you scoff at them charging a guy trying to get through airport security in, let's say, Honolulu using an ex-employer's ID because he can't be bothered to take his shoes off? Or should they have simply said, "Oops, sorry sir, even though the law says you're not allowed to do what you're doing we'll turn a blind eye this time because you seem like a nice chap"?

[RF4]

We seem to have lost sight of the fact that all of the reports read Knives - yes that is plural. We're not talking about a Leatherman here but a set of knives. Perhaps a gift received or a stupid impulse purchase for someone at home -- and he thought that he would try to get through the gestapo. What'e the worst that could happen ? They will confiscate the knives. Wrong - stupid decision !

[Shep69]

STP

Yup.

That is all.

[Flying Lawyer]

darkroomsource
I think this is not about airport security.

Possible.
However, a Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "On Saturday at around 9.10pm police at Heathrow Airport were called to a staff search area after a search of a member of flight crew, for a flight later that night, found them in possession of some knives.

Basically, if you have a reason to have a pocket knife, you're OK, but if you're carrying something that was clearly designed to inflict injury, you're going to jail.

Not necessarily.

If convicted, an offender may receive an immediate custodial sentence.
The sentence imposed will depend (amongst other things) upon the nature of the item, the circumstances of the offence and the offender's antecedents.

[Yonosoy Marinero]

STP,

No one is asking the security staff to turn a blind eye and let pilots go through with potential weapons.

But whatever happened to simply confiscating the item or even turning the chap back asking him to check it in? Does the police and sensationalist press really need to get involved?

Their jobs is to prevent any dangerous items from getting in the cabin, not to be imperious a$$holes about it.
It doesn't take many trips to LHR to understand that these idiots hate flight crews with a passion.

[g_attrill]

Having a set of chef's knives is very unlikely to result in this in the UK. It's a reasonable excuse to possess them if recently purchased and transporting them, and a pilot (or passenger) taking them home would be perfectly reasonable. So it could violate airport security rules, but not be an offence in general. IMO it was knives of another sort that didn't have an immediate reasonable explanation for possession, martial arts type items perhaps?

[RF4]

Oval3Holer
Flight delayed until next day due to no reserve crew?
Let's not overlook the pathetic fact that Cathay Pacific doesn't even have a pilot on reserve at its largest European base!

IN actual fact, CX says that "Cathay Pacific were unable to organise a relief crew" as a reason for the overnight delay. It intimates that no relief crew was organised. It leaves open the possibility that the originally scheduled crew did the flight. After all the pilot in question was available on bail ---- and it would be much cheaper !

[Steve the Pirate]

@Yonosoy Marinero

But whatever happened to simply confiscating the item or even turning the chap back asking him to check it in? Does the police and sensationalist press really need to get involved?

Without knowing the facts I can't really say what should or shouldn't have been done, despite my earlier statement regarding security staff SOPs. As yet we don't know the nature of the items, how they were concealed (if in fact they were), the pilot's reaction to the staff and so on. This may well have been an innocent mistake on the part of the pilot and I sincerely hope that it was. Whether he should have been arrested or not is perhaps a matter that Flying Lawyer would like to comment on? My original point was the apparent inconsistency that some have with their points of view depending on who we're dealing with, that's all.

[Herod]

Steve, you've just said what I was thinking. The security services have a job to do, and a knife is a prohibited article (apart from carrying one in a public place). Best wait and see what sort/size of knife it was.

[MrDK]

@Basil
"Hmm, those security chaps still haven't worked out that a pilot doesn't need a knife to crash an aircraft."

Might it be an easier task eliminating "the other side"?

[Dan_Brown]

Oh the gestapo. As the old an very true saying goes, "rules are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of fools."

[Shaman]

Banned Items at LHR include:

Sharp items
This includes knives (with blades over 6cm), razor blades, box cutters, scissors (with blades over 6cm from fulcrum), axes, hatchets, cleavers, ice axes, ice picks, swords, sabres and sharp or pointed martial arts equipment

Heathrow: Hand baggage and liquids | Cabin luggage screening at Heathrow (http://www.heathrowairport.com/heathrow-airport-guide/heathrow-security/hand-baggage#Banneditems)

[Jn14:6]

Just as well they didn't find the cricket bat which management had lodged up his @rse!:E

[NOMANSNEMESIS]

I flown over a great deal of the world as a longhaul Captain.

Heathrow security at the staff gates are the worst I have ever had the misfortune to meet, and by a large margin. TSA in the USA and particularly New York are supposed to be bad, in my experience they were helpful and flexible compared to LHR imbeciles.

Small minded, petty, anti crew, obstructive, unable to think for themselves.

TSA in the USA and particularly New York are supposed to be bad, in my experience they were helpful and flexible compared to LHR imbeciles.

This is not a UK law thing as Manchester security were also fine, just working colleagues trying to achieve the same end goal as us.

They managed to annoy me on many occasions, this reduced my performance on the subsequent flights and created a far greater hazard than the heinous threat posed by my 20 gramme tube of eye ointment.

If anyone is interested on the effect of a pre flight argument on a Pilot, look for Captain Stanley Key and the BA Trident crash.

Sack them and hire some adults with brains!

[Flying Lawyer]

StP
Whether he should have been arrested or not is perhaps a matter that Flying Lawyer would like to comment on?
Like everyone else here, I'm not in a position to offer a comment of any value. The information currently available is far too limited to do so.
I have no idea whether the circumstances were such that it was reasonable/unreasonable of security to involve the police, nor whether it was reasonable/unreasonable of the police who attended to arrest the pilot.
By way of general comment only -
It is an unfortunate fact of life that some people use common sense when given power and some don't. Time will tell whether that is relevant here.

My original point was the apparent inconsistency that some have with their points of view depending on who we're dealing with, that's all.
Is that unreasonable?
As a passenger, I readily understand why some airline pilots feel indignant about security procedures.

I would be entirely content with the pilots being treated differently from me - whether officially by different rules or by discretion being exercised.
That would include being allowed to take items on board which I, as a passenger, am not. eg Pilots have access to a crash axe whereas passengers do not. Seems reasonable to me.

I work on the basis that the pilots are as keen to arrive safely at our destination as I am. In the statistically extremely unlikely event that one or more of them isn't, then they don't need a knife or nail-clippers to spoil my day.

[Trinity 09L]

How about this as an answer
"I am the commander of this flight and responsible for what is loaded fuel, food, passengers cargo etc, so take them off me, place in the cargo, then as commander of the aircraft I will authorise its transfer to the flight deck when airside or do it myself"

BTW (Commander) as non UK citizen I am not aware of the laws of your country, I have bought them in good faith.

The UK law states "or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by some other person"
I await the CPS decision as to whether a charge is suitable in the public interest. :rolleyes:

[deptrai]

I would be entirely content with the pilots being treated differently from me - whether officially by different rules or by discretion being exercised. the reasoning behind sending flight crews through those "security checks" is that it makes passengers feel safe to see that. Meanwhile, Postman Pat who brings the mail to be loaded into the aircraft every day, happily driving around on the apron, doesn't get been bothered with such "ckecks". In theory, he could get searched, but it hasn't happened even once in 20 years. Unless he enters the terminal where the passengers are, to empty the mailbox there, then he also gets to endure the same procedure.

In summer, he plays football (an officially santioned tournament) on the grass 100m from the runway, with the airport police, the firefighters, and all the good guys (no, the "security" have never been invited), followed by a barbecue party. Nice world, I envy him. And yes, he could hide a lot of things in that mail that gets loaded into the aircraft. Or steal something. But hey, he's doing his job, and trust is a powerful thing. I trust him, and think it's good he doesn't get annoyed by routine searches.

[Shep69]

Spot on. Or how about the catering folks. Is EVERY soda can and wine bottle X-rayed to make sure it's soda and not something else ?

Special ops guys around the world make a living getting stuff into places it's hard to get stuff into. Not hard to imagine the same scenario with the folks who routinely bring stuff to the airplane.

So's methinks this is taking the illusion a bit too far. Unless they came upon some type of really unbalanced chap; but all kidding aside I don't know anyone I'd put into that category.

[JTG]

We were in Greece last month. Flying from Athens to Santorini my wife lost her Swiss Army knife to security. I had my knife in my pocket. 3 1/2 inch 3 blade. (both had forgotten to put in checked baggage) I made it thru and I was wand scanned because I set off the alarm. (metal on suspenders) they still missed the knife. I guess eye's saw metal on suspenders and didn't think twice when wand buzzer went off.

[Ranger One]

Those pointing out this has nothing to do with aviation security are largely correct; he would have been arrested if he had been stopped and searched by plod on Oxford Street; it just so happens it was a crew search at LHR instead. It wouldn't have made any difference if it was a pax search. It wouldn't have made any difference if they were found in checked bags. The possible offence is simple possession.

I think he may have a very strong defence. If you carry knives on Oxford Street, as others have pointed out, you need a 'reasonable excuse'; you need them for your work, you're off on a fishing trip, or something. If you carry them at LHR, about to board a flight, the excuse is bloody obvious - you're taking them out of the country! I'm sure Flying Lawyer would be able to advise us.

My stupidest security story? A few years ago I was pax out of JFK. TSA confiscated a tiny - 3" long, weighed a couple of ounces - adjustable spanner. When asked why, they looked puzzled, were obviously trying to think up an explanation, then one of them blurted out: "you could MAKE something with it!"...

[Flying Lawyer]

Shep69 Unless they came upon some type of really unbalanced chap; but all kidding aside I don't know anyone I'd put into that category.
Or, more likely, just for example (given his age), a long-serving captain who has passed through LHR security many times over many years either without previously encountering any problems when carrying the same item(s), or perhaps made an honest mistake on this occasion.

Ranger One
he would have been arrested if he had been stopped and searched by plod on Oxford Street
Would he?
How are you in a position to say that? :confused:

I'm sure Flying Lawyer would be able to advise us.
The only advice I'd give is:

(1) Wait for the facts to emerge.
It may then be possible to express an opinion about why this incident, involving a 61 year old airline pilot about to board his flight, resulted in an arrest.

(2) Don't attach any weight to what is said by posters playing barrack-room lawyers.


FL

[truckflyer]

Not much experience with LHR, but another North London airport with security staff's obsession to make life miserable for people.

Once I kindly requested not to remove my watch from my wrist, they was not happy, but excepted it, as I told them I knew the watch would not set it of!

Of course, I was right, passed the security perfectly. However the assistant manager come over to me, and told me I should not refuse security staff request. I told him that under no circumstances did I want to remove my watch, as it was of high value!

I was happy to be scanned if it set of the alert.

Anyway then the ingenious security staff told me, I had to remove it because it was an electronic device! It had to be, for the watch to work.
I kindly declined, and told him the watch was not an electronic device, in fact it had no electronic components inside, as it was a mechanical device.

By now this assistant manager started to get really agitated and blowing himself up, so I nicely explained him, that this was a mechanical watch, and if he was not aware of that this was possible, maybe he should educate himself a little before make such statements.

By now he wanted on this basis to refuse me entry, took my passport and boarding pass away from me, at this moment his boss come over to him, and wanted to know what was going on.
During this whole process I had not even bothered to get agitated! However some sense was seen by his boss, and I was allowed to enter trough the security!

This is the same security guard who gave a lecture to crew because they did not have sealed bags for liquids, and forced us to pay £1 for a a bag to get trough security with our tooth-paste!

[Copenhagen]

We are checked in security for our own safety and that of our families.

Just like bank robbers are kidnapping families so staff will open a safe, we could be used to bring items airside to be handed to someone else.

A good example of staff taking things through was the gun smuggling case recently in Atlanta where staff were using lax security for their own gain.

http://m.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/atlanta-airport-boosting-security-following-gun-sm/njhxG/#__federated=1

For all we complain about Heathrow security, sterile should mean for all and include us, no matter how big our collective ego has become that we deem ourselves above checking.

[White None]

Wherever one stands on the rules, their application, potential use of discretion etc etc. I strongly suspect that most of us could accept most of it if the attitude of the enforcing MUPPETS!!!!! was not so entirely unnecessary, unjustifiable and apparently unquestionable. Higher authorities should be all over this, I'm sure they've been told many times. In a country desperate to be demonstrably equal opportunity, minority protecting, politically correct in the extreme, how come Airline Crews are allowed to be harassed, publically embarrassed, treated with disrespect with the threat of rapid escalation to even more invasive, delay producing procedures.

[bufe01]

Copenhagen, leaving aside this particular incident, LHR is a world in itself everyone based there could tell you hundreds of pure harassment, arrogance, incompetence stories.
I as an operating pilot in uniform, ID etc. wasn't allowed in the gate waiting room while all the rest of the staff was. Yes I have been bollocked for carrying an extra size, 25x20 instead of 20x20, clear plastic bag or a mini toothpaste tube or water OUT of the airport after arrival or...and I could go on forever. I have seen D. Cameron at the time just PM candidate beeing strip searched holding is shoes in his hand ! I have been kept waiting for a supervisor because the machine kept going off and half naked and annoyed I told them a screw in my wrist was the only metal I had on me ! And finally I had Osama Bin Laden in a white robe, flat, round taliban hat, white robe, military jacket, long beard checking my ID and this is not a joke I seriously thought he was him. LHR is a different class even from the most anal US airport right after 7/11. One extra little reason to make me move to a different base.

[Scoreboard]

The indignations Steve is that Germanwings is the tip of the unspoken Elephant in the room...i.e. All the security checks in the world dont prevent deaths by a pilot who already has control of a deadly weapon. Its been an insulting joke for years....that coffee cant take that....even if you get coffee on board...cant take that golf club....but for the fire axe in the cockpit is still sitting there.

To calm the public, we are seen to be doing something but it actually doesnt do much. And thus the indignation in the majority of the posts.

[Ranger One]

Would he?
How are you in a position to say that? :confused:


I was thinking of cases such as this one:

Retired soldier arrested for taking tiny knife on train - Get Hampshire (http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/news/local-news/retired-soldier-arrested-taking-tiny-5362654)

It's hardly unknown for the police to be... somewhat zealous in their application and interpretation of the law regarding knives, shall we say? In addition the offences for which it's suggested he was arrested are not specifically aviation-related.


The only advice I'd give is:

(1) Wait for the facts to emerge.
It may then be possible to express an opinion about why this incident, involving a 61 year old airline pilot about to board his flight, resulted in an arrest.

(2) Don't attach any weight to what is said by posters playing barrack-room lawyers.


FL

I was thinking in particular of your view of the 'reasonable excuse' bit of the law in general, not in respect of the (unknown) facts of this particular case.

If a carpet-fitter is stopped carrying a knife on Oxford Street on his lunch break, the police *might* ask 'OK, but why are you carrying it *now*, why didn't you leave it at your job site?' - and many similar situations could be imagined; why isn't it in your toolbox / in your car / in your shed / in your kitchen would be the questions.

But when you're taking the knife with you on a trip, leaving the country, that's a pretty absolute 'reasonable excuse' defence, is it not? 'I have to have it with me because if I left it back at the hotel I couldn't take it home'. You see where I'm coming from? Stopping a traveller is pretty much the same situation as stopping someone on their way home from the knife shop; the 'reasonable excuse' test in such situations relates entirely to the journey and the destination, not to the occupation or intended use of the knife (although obviously if the police can establish that the knife was being carried *with nefarious intent*, that's 'offensive weapon' whatever the other circumstances, I think?)

Note that at no point am I making a distinction between having the knife on their person, in their carry-on, or in their checked baggage; the law doesn't make any distinction, simply having the knife in their possession and control is what matters, I believe?

[Yonosoy Marinero]

we could be used to bring items airside to be handed to someone else.

There are hundred of minimum wage ramp workers from all corners of the World who have much less to lose and would be easier to try and buy off to have something nasty carried airside.

As a matter of fact, I can't recall any of the ramp workers being checked anywhere near as thoroughly as flight crews are when going through the terminal staff security checkpoint. They're just basically waived through.

I wonder what size ceramic blade you could hide in a Dastar. Oh wait, it would be very un-PC to try and check that. Better not...

[Anotherday]

The Met Police arrested him, not sure why it's airport security getting slagged off here. Shouldn't all you whiners be complaining about the Met Police doing their job?

[White None]

Strongly suspect that the low IQ Panty Searchers don't have powers of arrest. Perhaps they have to phone another agency to make it - say perhaps the Met...... (He Whined)

[etopsmonkey]

Wow, this thread is getting pretty ugly, and posts with a racist-slant.
" ... ramp workers from all corners of the World ..."
" ... size ceramic blade you could hide in a Dastar..."
" ... Osama Bin Laden ... checking ID ... "

Just because you a white and a pilot, does not give you the privilege to waltz thru security and customs/immigration.

Back on topic. It was airport security that noticed the knives, and called a higher authority to determine how to proceed next. It was the London Metro police that laid the charges and subsequent arrest. And here we are, lambasting the airport security workers. The police was just enforcing the law as they interpret it. Police has the authority and responsibility to uphold law, even if you don't agree with it. At court, the judge/jury will decide whether the law was broken, and decide on the appropriate punishment - if any.

[paully]

Wow Etopsmonkey I bet you`re a joy to fly with, you are a pilot arn`t you??

As for the quotes, you obviously haven`t been to London in a long time, let alone Heathrow :ugh:

[Trossie]

As Flying Lawyer has said often enough, we need some more facts.

Re:The Met Police arrested him, not sure why it's airport security getting slagged off here. Shouldn't all you whiners be complaining about the Met Police doing their job?Could this end up similar to the police investigating election candidates for having sausage rolls or biscuits available to voters as potentially dangerous 'bribes'?At court, the judge/jury will decide whether the law was broken, and decide on the appropriate punishment - if any.And if this is proven to be the police vastly over-reacting with no law broken (which could easily be the case if he had bought a set of knives of some sort during his stop-over in London and was simply taking them home in his crew baggage), would there be any apology from the Met to the pilot involved and for the vast and unnecessary inconvenience to all of those passengers who could not fly that day?

Where I can see airport security being criticised is if it is an innocent case of him simply wanting to take something that he had (legally?) bought in London home with him, why did they not find a common sense way of resolving the situation, such as suggesting that the bag containing the knives needed to be 'checked in'? Sorry, I've just spotted the obvious flaw in that last sentence: use of the words 'common sense'!!

[4Greens]

What precisely is a 'leatherman' ?

Ignorant Pommie

[Cavitasian]

Well said 'paully' :D and a Leatherman is an American Swiss Army Knife '4Greens' :ok:

[Liam Gallagher]

I know nothing of this incident other than what I have read here.

I have flown with the person at the centre of this a few times. I always enjoyed flying with him and I hope he is OK.

I hope this is just some sort of misunderstanding and seen as such and there are no serious repercussions.

[Flying Lawyer]

Ranger One

I stand by what I said in my previous post.
I don't wish to appear discourteous but posts such as yours confuse rather than clarify.

the offences for which it's suggested he was arrested are not specifically aviation-relatedNo-one has suggested that they are.

Re your link -
That strikes me as a good illustration of a point I made earlier in the thread: 'It is an unfortunate fact of life that some people use common sense when given power and some don't.'

etopsmonkeyPolice has the authority and responsibility to uphold law
That does not mean that police officers have a duty or obligation to arrest (or even report) everyone they suspect has committed a criminal offence.
Nor does it preclude the exercise of common sense.
(I'm referring to the UK. The position may be different in other jurisdictions.)

.

[VR-HFX]

Trossie

You are so right.

Airport security the world over is confusing, non-uniform and seems in my many years of observation to be as much an illusion as a reality. Made even more so by the fact that many who have access to the ramp seem to be subject to less scrutiny.

Penetrable by the experts and a huge hindrance to all who pass through her.

LHR is at the pinnacle. After you pass through you feel as though you have been mugged.

When the last line of defence is manned by staff who are poorly trained and poorly paid is it any wonder common sense is a concept as alien as particle physics?

Why HM's finest where called and did what they did will hopefully be revealed. Here's hoping there will be no unnecessary repurcussions.

[Trossie]

That does not mean that police officers have a duty or obligation to arrest (or even report) everyone they suspect has committed a criminal offence.
Nor does it preclude the exercise of common sense. After very publicly having turned a blind eye to a major jewellery burglary, I can imagine that one cannot expect the Met to use common sense for anything that risks public attention for quite some time.

So check very carefully before carrying any knives anywhere near London! (I would suggest that buying kitchen knives 'on line' might be the best way to go about such purchases, so that the delivery man is the one who risks 'being in possession' of those knives while they have to transit through 'public places'.)

Here's hoping there will be no unnecessary repurcussions.... unless "Mr Plod's" actions are proven to have been inappropriate, then there have already been 'unnecessary repercussions': to all of those passengers who could not fly that day.

[Epsomdog]

When the last line of defence is manned by staff who are poorly trained and poorly paid is it any wonder common sense is a concept as alien as particle physics?

I have worked at LHR as a LAE since 1970. I have passed through security every day of my working life and have seen the security evolve from holding up a fag packet, with a cheery wave, to the current process.

Nowadays the security staff are highly trained and regulated at their job. The application of "common sense" by the front line staff is beyond their remit! They have a rule book to follow!

ALL STAFF at LHR have to endure the search process! So we grit our teeth, keep stum, and quietly comply with the requests from the security staff, who are just doing they're job.

Most of the confrontations I have witnessed at LHR, have stemmed from the occasional Prima Donna (some of which are pilots), that believe the security process doesn't apply to them! The argument that because I'm a pilot and can bring down an aircraft at will, just doesn't stack up! Once airside anyone including pilots have access to any aircraft, including ones they're not flying.

I know the security process is infuriating! It's something we have to endure and yes some of them are Jobsworths but there is never anything to be gained from arguing with them! Remember, when you're arguing and telling the security guard you need special treatment, everyone watching just think you're an eejut!

SECURITY APPLIES TO EVERYONE

I have a mantra that I say to myself when getting stressed with security,

"If they were intelligent, they wouldn't be able to do their job".

I know it doesn't apply to all of them but it always makes me feel better when I say it! Just don't say it to their face;)

[Arfur Dent]

Well said Epsom! Switch off, don't argue, take off belts, jackets, watches and sometimes shoes. Empty pockets, walk through, collect your stuff and go and get dressed next to a lovely flight attendant. Keep calm and enjoy your day.
ON THE OTHER HAND :mad::mad::mad::mad:
No - don't do that......:ok:

[jolihokistix]

"A pilot, though to be in his sixties, is arrested an hour before he was due to fly hundreds of people thousands of miles."

And that is the level of English on Sky... :ugh:

[Piltdown Man]

We are missing some facts here. They guy may we'll have had some knives; maybe he went knife shopping? How many and what kind? Were these knives packaged or were they ready to plunged into an unsuspecting person's body? And how long were the blades? COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 185/2010 makes it clear that blades no longer than 6cm are acceptable on flights and Duty-free in LSGG do a roaring trade in Swiss Army knives to departing passengers. As far as I am concerned, this is just another example of "Sh!tty Britain".

[Epsomdog]

Part of the problem is crews are coming through security with cabin and hold baggage. They don't have the option to put restricted items, such as a carving knife, into their hold baggage, prior to the security checks.

Maybe that's something that could be changed. Possibly a crew check in area?

[Trossie]

Possibly a crew check in area?The best suggestion here so far. The problem is that so many crews away from their home bases have to take their 'nightstop' bags with them through security. (And there is no consistency around the world with the way these are viewed by security.) Some facts would be interesting in this case, was this just a case of a nightstop bag not meeting the full security requirements? And if so, why were the Met brought in without another satisfactory solution being found? I suspect we'll never know because this case will probably never get to an open court but will just be 'quietly' dropped. Of course, without any apology from the authorities who drop the case to all those passengers who were inconvenienced.

[Steve the Pirate]

@Flying Lawyer

In response to my statement about inconsistency:

Is that unreasonable?
As a passenger, I readily understand why some airline pilots feel indignant about security procedures.

I would be entirely content with the pilots being treated differently from me - whether officially by different rules or by discretion being exercised.

Fair comment but I wasn't referring to the inconsistency between people but of people - what's acceptable to some one week isn't the next, depending on the topic. Would those who are denigrating the security staff and police have had the same reaction had the headline referred to a pilot from a different airline and perhaps of different ethnicity, I wonder?

Shep69 stated that he expected the TSA to turn a blind eye to the pilot who tried to go into a secure airport area using false credentials (inasmuch that they belonged to an ex-employer) is not only incredulous but, quite frankly, alarming. I'd be interested to hear your view on that particular incident and whether you think the TSA and FBI over-reacted?

Anyway, that was my point.

[luganao]

i really laugh at the nonsense you guys write.
At the end of the day the question is did the suspect break the law of the country.
Time will tell.
I guess the PR guys in CX or Swire or HSBC are really worried!

[jvr]

quote:
We are missing some facts here. They guy may we'll have had some knives; maybe he went knife shopping? How many and what kind? Were these knives packaged or were they ready to plunged into an unsuspecting person's body? And how long were the blades? COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 185/2010 makes it clear that blades no longer than 6cm are acceptable on flights and Duty-free in LSGG do a roaring trade in Swiss Army knives to departing passengers. As far as I am concerned, this is just another example of "Sh!tty Britain".

PM

Not quit.
The eu regulation states that all knives over 6 cm blade are out of bounds and smaller ones as long as they have an sharp point or sharp edge.

"objects with a sharp point or sharp edge — objects with a sharp point or sharp edge capable of being used to cause serious injury, including:
— items designed for chopping, such as axes, hatchets and cleavers,

— ice axes and ice picks,

— razor blades,

— box cutters,

— knives with blades of more than 6 cm,

— scissors with blades of more than 6 cm as measured from the fulcrum,

— martial arts equipment with a sharp point or sharp edge,

— swords and sabres;

"

obviously in Switserland the swiss army knife is not considered sharp and pointy;)

[Shutterbug]

My understanding is it concerns old-fashioned straight razors and it was a packing oversight. He was allowed on through to the a/c and subsequently some nervous Nelly hit the panic button and had the cops called.

A pathetic mess.

I hope he gets through this okay and with his career intact.

[Shep69]

STP--If you'd find stuff like that alarming or incredulous I personally hope you aren't either a pilot or a pirate; to me it shows a lack of SA and facing the reality of the situation (which is important to pirates and pilots alike). Apparently the guy had done it for months.

Not much of a threat; the airplanes got to where they were going just fine. Just a guy who (illegally) wanted to get through the hoops unencumbered (showing a lack of SA on HIS part as well). The only threat he seems to have presented so far is in suing companies for stuff they might have done wrong. Not saying one should do illegal things, but most of us found our way through high school with good looking fake ID's which worked well in much the same manner. Just a limit of the system which we don't make better by pretending it doesn't exist like mindless drones. If one can't exercise judgment and see the big picture, one should not be in the business of security, policing, OR piloting (or even pirating for that matter).

Meanwhile Aunt Betty and Uncle Fred from Iowa get strip searched while Al-Unsafe seems to get through with ease.

The point is losing the big picture on security by putting in place silly feel good measures (which only punish rank amateurs and the good guys) hurts everyone. Including apparently the crew and pax (as well as the company picking up the tab) on THIS particular flight.

[Steve the Pirate]

Shep69, sorry, this question was aimed at Flying Lawyer as I thought you'd made your final comment on my original question by stating:

STP

Yup.

That is all.

Thread drift here and I apologise to everyone in advance. You say he'd been doing it for months - does that make it OK? Does someone who habitually speeds through a suburban street (not yours) 'for months' break a law and pose a threat or not, or is it simply the fact that he hasn't been caught? If that same driver were driving through your street, even if you knew who he was as a fellow member of your club, would your point of view change?

Regarding the time when this individual was caught, who was at fault, him or the TSA officer? In a statement that I read that was linked in an earlier thread on the topic, his lawyer made the following statement:

his Honolulu defense attorney in the criminal case, attributed a possible head injury from that crash as a reason for his actions at the airport. [The pilot], now a student at Tulane University, said in court he can't explain what he did.

If this was his defence, how can you state that his actions were "Not much of a threat"? The planes might have got where they were meant to on previous occasions but who can state categorically, given his defence lawyers claim, that he was of sound mind? Clearly I'm not in a position to as I'm not a medical professional but the lawyer's statement did make me question his (the pilot's) mental state. (As an aside, I asked myself if indeed that was really his defence).

To reiterate, I raise this question not about him per se but rather to fully understand your point of view on airport security and threats affecting our industry. Oh, and I assume from your Aunt Betty/Uncle Fred/Al-Unsafe example you're of the opinion that those who pose a threat to our industry are only of one particular panethnic group?

[RHEINHARD]

Shep
I'm not sure what point(s) you're trying to make. Security applies to us all; some countries (NLD, GERMANY, and even HKG) allow crews a certain amount of leeway in what the crew can take on, as we are crews. Sadly the UK does not. In fact they have been pressurizing other EU countries to adopt their own draconian standards, so far resisted. I'm not sure what the big picture is meant to be in your case; certain items are prescribed; cut throat razors, parangs, kitchen scissors and even kitchen knives are probably amongst them, irrespective of whether you bought them on a trip and they are packaged or not. This should apply to everyone, pilots, cabin crew, line engineers, etc. etc. without favour. If a passenger attempted to bring any of this crap onboard in his hand baggage we'd have a fit, and rightly so. Why therefore, with all our inherent human frailties, are we any different ? With the recent hacking to death of a serviceman (a musician;always a hard target) in the street by a pair of certifiable nutters (that sadly dignifies them too much) acting under the guise of religion, the UK authorities are understandably a bit sensitive on the subject of knives, blades etc. In this example if, as it appears is the case, the individual was based, then he would have had ample opportunity to put the items in his check in baggage, and check it through the normal CX counter, perhaps even pointing out before it drops through the hole to be x'rayed/ pillaged/ stolen that he had knives or razors in there.. No harm done, arse and job covered, he goes on his way rejoicing. To try and go through airport security in this day and age in the UK or anywhere else for that matter, recent events notwithstanding, with any form of potentially offensive weapon, however they choose to construe them, is frankly asinine.

Someone else mentioned a dedicated crew drop off; there is one at LHR, and it seems to be used as some sort of training set up for the would be stormtroopers that then go on to man the internal airport security channel. If anything, a singularly more unpleasant experience (if that is possible) than using the landside channel. The nonsense with that arrangement, and it is unique I think to Heathrow, is that you take your hold baggage with you, have that checked, not sealed, and then proceed with the same baggage airside, to then leave it at the the back of the aircraft, usually in the rain. Allowing you, if you were so minded, access to whatever non-allowable cabin items you put in there, before going back on the aircraft. Truly nonsensical.

Finally, with respect to the Hawaii "incident" which you have somehow managed to conflate in to this discussion. Most of us thankfully did not go through our school years having to use a fake ID, nor pass through a metal detector to get in the gates. Long may it continue. This individual was patently in the wrong, and as a former Naval officer should have known better, notwithstanding some alleged trauma nonsense influencing his judgement, and in my opinion he should have been banged up for it. In any event, he has almost certainly breached certain parts of the ANO here. Perhaps we should apply for his extradition and prosecute him here ? By extension, why didn't he take his CX card, change the photograph, (I'm sure that wouldn't be too difficult as apparently there is a wealth of experience in fake school id cards in the US) and sell it to Mr. Al-unsafe whilst he's at it. :=

[Shep69]

Rhein, you'll have to speak for yourself when you say have a fit. I can personally say I'd be no more distraught by someone having knives or other sharp objects on their carry on than I would be by them having access to a wine bottle or any one of the hundreds of other things that could potentially be used as a weapon onboard any aircraft. It isn't the object that counts and this phosophy I see as a trap. In fact I kinda feel sorry for folks who demonize or are afraid of inatimate objects--for whatever reason. Weee we interested in real security I'd think we'd look more into behaviour and background than sharp things and stuff. Scanners CAN reach their forte in looking for explosives and perhaps that is what we should be spending limited resources looking for rather than keying in on minutia.

Having said all that I do pack very very carefully and try to stay keenly aware of anything in a carry on. Other than a potential plant by a bad guy, this has little to do with safety or security and everything to do with not running afoul of some rule somewhere--and that's the point.

I personally see the 'head injury' thing by the Hawaii guy more as a lawyer ploy to get the guy off with a lighter sentence. Seems to have worked.

BTW, We didn't have IDa in school when I was a kid either; the fake IDs were for liquor, tobacco, and to get in places it was deemed weren't appropriate for us to go. They seemed to work well.

[VR-HFX]

silber

Like you I have done the same thing with a set of old ivory-handled Sheffield steak knives I picked up at the Portobello Markets, but that was at least 5 or so years ago. I didn't have a problem but I think times have changed.

I don't think security systems have made us safer by any measure, just more stressed. Great reason to stay off the pax fleet.

[RevMan2]

If we filter out the dimwitted "Nazi/Gestapo/SS/Sturmtrooper/crowbar/fire axe" posts, we're left with a handful by thinking people who agree that:

You can't take sharp objects through security. Anywhere.
Airline staff should know this better than anyone
The police don't get involved for a Swiss Army knife
We don't know the full story.

[mcdude]

Fully agree RevMan

[darkroomsource]

Revman +1

[Yonosoy Marinero]

There are also those who will stand by a colleague and long time employee of this airline with the not so very far fetched assumption that it was a honest, if a bit daft, mistake. We all make those.

I'll gladly put my weight on his side of the balance just on the knowledge that being a long time pilot of this outfit, he could be the guy I'd least want to fly with and I'd still firmly believe he is not the psychopathic criminal the newspapers and trigger-happy security bozos so desperately want him to be.

I'd also like the community of my peers to stand up behind me the day I unwillingly screw up. Alas, we are the best at crying fool we our employers pushes the cucumber in, but we quick to push it up each other's arses at the first stumble.

Not to mention that anyone that has had the pleasure of dealing with LHR security will know them for the paranoid, bullheaded, pathetically inept, blinkers-wearing glorified shopping-centre security guards they are.

Assumption made. Side taken. I stand by it.
I hope life goes back to normal for him soon.

[Flying Lawyer]

luganao I really laugh at the nonsense you guys write …….
I find that people who see the world in black and white are usually missing gray matter.

STP
In answer to your question about the ex CX pilot who tried to cheat the security queue in Honolulu -
No, I don't think the TSA or the FBI over-reacted; his conduct clearly had to be investigated.
Whether prosecution was necessary in the particular circumstances could be reasonably argued either way.
Whilst what he did was both very stupid and a criminal offence, I have no reason to believe that he was a security risk.
I wouldn't attach any weight to his lawyer's (silly) comment during mitigation. If there had been any foundation for it, medical evidence would have been adduced.
I think the penalty (3 years probation) was entirely appropriate in all the circumstances.
According to various news reports, the prosecutor did not seek a prison sentence. Given the particular circumstances (of the offence and the offender) that does not surprise me.

Silberfuchs
The word "concealed" may have a lot to do with it?
Where does the word "concealed" come into it? :confused:
On the information currently available, I have no reason to be believe that the item(s) were concealed.
The fact that an item is not on public display does not necessarily mean it is concealed.
darkroomsource described the relevant legislation as "concealed weapons laws". That is not correct.

Yonosoy Marinero I'd also like the community of my peers to stand up behind me the day I unwillingly screw up. The chances of that happening on PPRuNe are not good - although it should always be borne in mind that not all posters are your peers, nor even professional pilots.
You are in a far better position than me to assess what would be likely to happen where it matters.

Revman2

I'm content to be included amongst those you regard as dimwitted.
I'll bear it with as much fortitude as I can muster.

[deptrai]

PPrune is not some kangaroo court to decide on the virtues of others, and I am also content to be included amongst the dimwitted here. I should know what not to bring through security, and I confess I have made mistakes.

[Steve the Pirate]

@Flying Lawyer

Thank you for your erudite and considered response to my question.

[RevMan2]

@ Flying Lawyer

It surprises me that a person of your obvious intelligence and demonstrated eloquence would willing group him/herself with users of xenophobic cliches and puerile historical stereotypes.

One never learns, though...

[mr Q]

The law in respect of offensive weapons in HK is similar to English law.
In theory had the pilot been detected carrying these items into HK he could have been in the same predicament with the HK police as he appears to be with the Met.
Hopefully the English prosecution system will exercise discretion when he answers his bail and not prosecute.
I wish him luck

[Trossie]

Well hidden amongst RevMan2's other comments is the best comment on this thread (which is out of sorts with his other comments):We don't know the full story.

[iceman50]

Trossie

The comment you referred to is not hidden, just not seen by some of the blinkered posters on here. We do not know the full facts, yet there has been, at times, hysterical comments about the security staff, when nobody knows whether the comments are as yet warranted!

Security is a pain and we have to put up with it, if people do not want the hassle take up another profession.

Shep69

I find your comments laughable and our whole security system post 9/11 is down to the good old US of A. Remind me again which flights were hijacked, yes, that's correct DOMESTIC flights, which in those days had pretty poor security prior to boarding. But with knee jerk reaction the WHOLE WORLD had to comply with security regulations imposed by the good old US of A!

[Cyber Bob]

As an aside, did you know that a Baked Bean is a liquid? - It's considered as such at LHR. Although baked beans a traditionally coated on tomato sauce according to Dumb & Dumber at LHR staff search, the bean itself is a liquid.

Now that i've been enlightened, it's opened up a whole new world!

I'll leave that one with you

CB

[Bronx]

iceman50
Shep69

I find your comments laughable and our whole security system post 9/11 is down to the good old US of A. Remind me again which flights were hijacked, yes, that's correct DOMESTIC flights, which in those days had pretty poor security prior to boarding. But with knee jerk reaction the WHOLE WORLD had to comply with security regulations imposed by the good old US of A!
Laughable? :confused:

Is Shep69 to blame for America's kneejerk reaction to 9/11?
He's been arguing since the beginning of the thread that the regulations do a lot to inconvenience the innocent in unnecessary ways and not much to stop the determined bad guys.

Do you disagree?

[Pogie]

Hmm, those security chaps still haven't worked out that a pilot doesn't need a knife to crash an aircraft. I hear this stupid comment all the time. It's not the pilot highjacking his own aircraft that's the concern. The concern is that the pilot passes the knife off to another person in the terminal who then gets on another aircraft.

If any pilot is dense enough to think it's okay to bring a knife through security because he's a pilot, then he deserves whatever happens to him as a result. Hopefully this involves getting fired. We don't need any more stupidity in the cockpit than we already have.

[tipsy2]

Pogie

Hopefully this involves getting fired.

Or worse, make him a manager

Tipsy:ok:

[Trossie]

But with knee jerk reaction the WHOLE WORLD had to comply with security regulations imposed by the good old US of A!Not correct. British security regulations were already well ahead of US regulations (due to experiences of Lockerbie, etc.) so did not suffer any 'knee jerk' reaction. If the 'good old US of A' wants to insist on regulations for flights into the 'good old US of A', that is entirely up to them. The 'WHOLE WORLD' can do what they like on their own... (But then maybe there is a threat out there and the 'WHOLE WORLD' is actually being sensible.)

But the problem here is the way crews are treated so very differently in different parts of the world. LHR obviously doesn't give any leeway so it is not surprising that on the odd occasion there will be someone 'caught out' doing what he/she might expect as being normal elsewhere. The problem is: Is common sense used when dealing with it, or is the 'miscreant' instantly treated as a criminal?

[FERetd]

Pogie Quote :-"The concern is that the pilot passes the knife off to another person in the terminal who then gets on another aircraft......We don't need any more stupidity in the cockpit than we already have".

And what are we to do about 300+ passengers being given knives and forks - real ones at the front end? Not to mention those bottles of duty free that are bought after the security check.

Finger food for everyone?

No, we certainly don't need any more stupidity in the cockpit.

[iceman50]

Trossie

I should have been more specific on the regulations, the UK was well ahead, as well as some other nations.

[Lowkoon]

I find japanese chopsticks much pointier than chinese chopsticks. Hoping for regulation soon to save me from a vicious chopstick wielding maniac on a rampage through the cabin. Have you seen what Kungfu Panda and master Shifu can do with a set of those? But what happens if he ever gets hold of a fluro light bulb, we ail be runed. My god, the fat belts! he could whip me! Or wet some toilet paper and throw it at me, or even worse, come at me with the sharp edge of the aluminium cover on a Y class meal! Or roll up a duty free magazine and give me a good wallop or infict a paper cut from a sick bag! Yep, big picture stuff alright, thank god they stopped the leatherman. :hmm: Imagine if he had nail clippers as well, and eyebrow tweezers, or a longer than usual car key, then where would we be as a civilisation? it doesn't bare contemplating.

[TWT]

Yep.All you have to do is get a pencil sharpener aboard and you can modify the chopsticks :ugh:

[monster330]

This industry is in complete and utter decline.

What a shame.

What a total ballzup

Rosters, management, security, management.....can a good word be said about any of it!

[Lowkoon]

It ends when you retire....

[Bronx]

FERetd
:) :ok:



Just 11 years ago, a newbie was asking a whole lot of questions when he was trying to get into Cathay, and again when they gave him a 747 freighter base job in North America.
He didn't like being seated down the back when commuting on US carriers despite travelling in his new airline pilot's uniform :ugh: but he was very happy to have a job with a legacy carrier.
And on the plus side, rapid command/seniority jumping was "available to anyone in the company that passes a command assessment. If an FO has been with the company 8 years and wants a Freighter command, all he has to do is apply."

So how does a guy whose been given a whole lot of advice on Prune, even about doing his BFR to fly his N-reg GA aircraft and buying Bose's for it etc respond when someone else (a 320 captain in another airline) asks very politely for insiders opinions about applying to Cathay as a direct entrant FO? I love the little throw in about you being a 320 captain. Good for you! Your mother must be proud. But if you want to join a real airline, that doesn't mean anything (especially being a light twin.) You join at the bottom like everyone else.
Of course -- you can always just jump from one crap start-up airline to another. You'll probably even get to keep your beloved Baby-Jet, 4-Bar thing if you do, so you won't bruise your delicate ego. Someone else assured the OP that "not everyone in CX is a rude moron". :ok:

Why am I not surprised by the reaction of this 11 years with the company sky-god when a colleague (61) gets arrested at LHR?

Hopefully this involves getting fired.
He'd only been with Cathay for 5 years when he was asking what the experience of the 55+ guys added to the company and only 6 years when he was complaining about "old farts that won't leave" even though nearly all the world's airlines had moved retirement age to 65.
We don't need any more stupidity in the cockpit than we already have.


We? :rolleyes:

Not every American is an arrogant ***hole, but folks like Pogie don't help.

[JammedStab]

I hear this stupid comment all the time. It's not the pilot highjacking his own aircraft that's the concern. The concern is that the pilot passes the knife off to another person in the terminal who then gets on another aircraft.



I suspect that the concern is that the person in a pilots uniform could be an imposter.

How difficult is it for anyone to buy a pilots uniform. And with todays technology, it is probably not that difficult for someone with a bit of talent to create a security pass, especially a foreign one which the local security staff would be less familiar with.

So.....just go through security like a passenger would. And if you are carrying something unusual, perhaps before trying to go through security, ask to speak to the person in charge if certain items are permissible.

[plainpilot11]

I suspect that there is a lot more to this than what we've heard. After all, it's been over 6 days now since the incident, and it seems the information coming out came to a grinding halt nearly immediately after the incident. Makes me think that the reactionary media has found out that it wasn't that big of a deal after all, and let go of the story quickly to avoid embarrassment.

[Trafalgar]

...at least now they are going after the real terrorists... :ugh:

Four-year-old boy frisked and forced to hand over toy gun that fired SPONGE darts after it was deemed a security risk by East Midlands Airport | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3056027/Four-year-old-boy-frisked-forced-hand-toy-gun-fired-SPONGE-darts-deemed-security-risk-East-Midlands-Airport.html)

[deptrai]

"And if you are carrying something unusual, perhaps before trying to go through security, ask to speak to the person in charge if certain items are permissible."

Good idea, I support that, but my experience tells me, some people, like me, will make (honest) mistakes. I'm counting about .25 mistakes per year. I'd like to see airport security empowered to make their own decisions, not relying so much on rules...Israel, a country that has some experience dealing with terrorism, has been doing that for a long time, with some success I think.

[speedyb]

Why would a member of the flight crew need to carry any "sharp, pointy things" with him? I would be taking a second look at him if he were paired with me. While I flew in and out of Heathrow to many times to count, if security finds a pilot packing knives, kudos to them.

[CYRILJGROOVE]

The toothpicks in the crew sandwiches would probably do more damage than what he had.

Do they arrest passengers in the UK who accidentally leave Swiss Army knives or similar in their carry on luggage....or do they just take it from them, and give them a verbal bollocking.......serious question

[Epsomdog]

....or do they just take it from them, and give them a verbal bollocking.......serious question

With 40 years of experiance with Heatrow security, I would say, YES, that's exactly what happens. Most of the time.

However, if you argue, attempt to reason and or loose your cool.......?

Who knows what happened in this case? None of us were there!

[Flying Lawyer]

speedybif security finds a pilot packing knives, kudos to them No-one has criticised security for finding the item(s).
Discussion has focused upon what happened afterwards.

"packing" knives? :confused:
That term is usually used in a pejorative sense.
Was that intentional, or did you simply mean contained in his hand luggage - just as he was probably 'packing' a toothbrush?


EpsomdogHowever, if you argue, attempt to reason
At airports and elsewhere, whether an incident escalates out of all proportion can depend upon the personality and calibre of the police officer(s) who attend.
For example: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/160845-uk-pilot-breathalysed-after-go-arounds.html

It will be interesting to see what happens when the facts are considered by the CPS and to learn whether this was a serious incident or a trivial matter blown up out of all proportion.

[deptrai]

It will be interesting to see what happens when the facts are considered

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for people to consider facts of a particular incident, as a long as the laws/rules are silly.

Flight attendants and passengers keep getting injured by heavy hand luggage falling out of overhead bins. This is a real, not an imaginary threat. Now what if someone intentionally swings their 15 kilo hardshell hand luggage at your head? Then there are the hundreds of glass bottles pax are carrying. Oxygen tanks and fire extinguishers could also make formidable weapons. The on-board cutlery, chopsticks, fire axes, etc etc, it's all well known. I'm not saying we should ban all that, just like I think it's (barely) fair to allow engineers on duty around the aircraft to have access to a spanner. How about if some malicious terrorist fuel truck driver would speed out onto a runway in just the wrong moment...can you imagine the disaster? But according to current rules, some yoghurt carried by a pilot is getting more attention. How many have actually been hurt by a yoghurt? Let's just face it, there are nonsensical elements in the ongoing "security charade". Knives or whatever, I put up with it and do my best to comply...but there is room for improvement, and I think that is a more interesting debate, in general, than to consider the facts of some particular case where someone got caught carrying something he/she shouldn't. Yawn.

[Tourettes_Guy]

Until it is officially disclosed what type of knife was found and the actual circumstances of the 'arrest' why is so much time, effort and venom being spent trading insults and apportioning blame? The threads and 'limited' information available suggests that security took possession of the 'knife' in question and allowed the pilot to proceed. Looks to me like they did their job in accordance with regulatory requirements. Regulatory requirements that apply to all, even pilots! If thereafter the police have been informed surely the question must be asked of them as to why the pilot was detained. Why are the security staff being chastised for following the requirements stipulated by ICAO in accordance with Annex 17 and the UK NCASP? Some very derogatory remarks have been laid at the door of the security staff who, after all do their best to protect operating crews and passengers. Some of you (NOT ALL) sound like Prima Dona's who operate above regulation merely because they are professional pilots (and no doubt good ones). To those who fall into this category, do yourselves a favour and act accordingly. Stop bringing this profession into disrepute. Everyone has a right to answer and no doubt the pilot concerned will explain all in due course. Until then, remember everyone employed in aviation is on the same side. They all have jobs to do.

[Sue Ridgepipe]

why is so much time, effort and venom being spent trading insults and apportioning blame?
Welcome to PPRuNe.

[Arfur Dent]

Honest mistake by a good human being. Don't do it again - no harm done - move on. :cool:

[BalusKaptan]

Exactly right A.D.
No knives as such were involved. That was just the classification the tools were placed under. Ultimately going to be a storm in a tea cup and red faces all round.

[Epsomdog]

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for people to consider facts of a particular incident, as a long as the laws/rules are silly.

Flight attendants and passengers keep getting injured by heavy hand luggage falling out of overhead bins. This is a real, not an imaginary threat. Now what if someone intentionally swings their 15 kilo hardshell hand luggage at your head? Then there are the hundreds of glass bottles pax are carrying. Oxygen tanks and fire extinguishers could also make formidable weapons. The on-board cutlery, chopsticks, fire axes, etc etc, it's all well known. I'm not saying we should ban all that, just like I think it's (barely) fair to allow engineers on duty around the aircraft to have access to a spanner. How about if some malicious terrorist fuel truck driver would speed out onto a runway in just the wrong moment...can you imagine the disaster? But according to current rules, some yoghurt carried by a pilot is getting more attention. How many have actually been hurt by a yoghurt? Let's just face it, there are nonsensical elements in the ongoing "security charade". Knives or whatever, I put up with it and do my best to comply...but there is room for improvement, and I think that is a more interesting debate, in general, than to consider the facts of some particular case where someone got caught carrying something he/she shouldn't. Yawn.

I think this thread is going round in circles!

It seems like a fairly simple dilemma.

1. Do we need security rules and restrictions?
Assuming the answer is yes, then....
2. Should those rules and restrictions apply to everyone, equally?

My view is most certainly, YES to both! If you allow special exemptions then you create a loophole or weakness that can be exploited by any would be terrorist!

[White Knight]

Quote:
Originally Posted by deptrai
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for people to consider facts of a particular incident, as a long as the laws/rules are silly.

Flight attendants and passengers keep getting injured by heavy hand luggage falling out of overhead bins. This is a real, not an imaginary threat. Now what if someone intentionally swings their 15 kilo hardshell hand luggage at your head? Then there are the hundreds of glass bottles pax are carrying. Oxygen tanks and fire extinguishers could also make formidable weapons. The on-board cutlery, chopsticks, fire axes, etc etc, it's all well known. I'm not saying we should ban all that, just like I think it's (barely) fair to allow engineers on duty around the aircraft to have access to a spanner. How about if some malicious terrorist fuel truck driver would speed out onto a runway in just the wrong moment...can you imagine the disaster? But according to current rules, some yoghurt carried by a pilot is getting more attention. How many have actually been hurt by a yoghurt? Let's just face it, there are nonsensical elements in the ongoing "security charade". Knives or whatever, I put up with it and do my best to comply...but there is room for improvement, and I think that is a more interesting debate, in general, than to consider the facts of some particular case where someone got caught carrying something he/she shouldn't. Yawn.

I think this thread is going round in circles!

It seems like a fairly simple dilemma.

1. Do we need security rules and restrictions?
Assuming the answer is yes, then....
2. Should those rules and restrictions apply to everyone, equally?

My view is most certainly, YES to both! If you allow special exemptions then you create a loophole or weakness that can be exploited by any would be terrorist!



Well MY view is NO.... In light of the qoute that YOU pasted! ANYONE can, at ANTIME, f*** up an airliner... I am sick of the security BS that I have to go through just to board MY aeroplane... I have potentially 250 tonnes of explosive in my fuel tanks; and I have to remove my belt at 'security'?

You're just another sheep that's been brainwashed by the 'Ones in Charge'.

[OK4Wire]

I've been at this aviation lark a long time, and I have to agree with you.

Do a basic check for guns and bombs, and that's it. Open the cockpit doors again. (it'll never happen, though: I've never seen a government agency or department "downsize").

[Good Business Sense]

I was shocked when I found out how many vehicles, large and small, that enter the ramp areas of a rather large London airport completely unsearched !

[Epsomdog]

Well MY view is NO.... In light of the qoute that YOU pasted! ANYONE can, at ANTIME, f*** up an airliner... I am sick of the security BS that I have to go through just to board MY aeroplane... I have potentially 250 tonnes of explosive in my fuel tanks; and I have to remove my belt at 'security'?

You're just another sheep that's been brainwashed by the 'Ones in Charge'.

So much vitriol!

I'm afraid there will always be confrontations with security whilst there are attitudes such as these!

I appreciate you are free to express your opinion, as I am! (Time to bite my tongue, I think).

[Frogman1484]

A few years back a cabin crew try to board the flight in Moscow with an AK47 air soft gun in her hand luggage.

I can just imagine what would have happened in London!

The Moscow security, after the initial panic, took the gun away and let her through.

[deptrai]

1. Do we need security rules and restrictions?
Assuming the answer is yes, then....
2. Should those rules and restrictions apply to everyone, equally?

My view is most certainly, YES to both! If you allow special exemptions then you create a loophole or weakness that can be exploited by any would be terrorist!

There are already numerous different "exemptions", including programs such as the US "known crew member" process: crew, based on certain conditions, can in most cases can pass without scanning and searching. It's not so much an exemption from screening, rather it's a pre-screening. This is part of a risk-based approach to screening, where scarce resources are focused on the the highest risk individuals. Not for the personal convenience of crew, but to increase overall security. Mindless repeat searches of everyone in exactly the same way every time is not the best approach to security. As for your worries about loopholes, these can easily be addressed with "exemptions from exemptions", ie random and/or targeted full search of pre-screened individuals. Also consider that certain exemptions from your simplistic "same rules for everyone" are needed for security reasons, such as allowing armed police in sterile airside areas. This is not a loophole: they are not exempt from screening, they are subject to more stringent screening than most pax, it's just done as a pre-screening.

Further, the mindless focus on certain specific items is a distraction. Israel, which uses highly trained interrogators for airport security, is instead focusing on behavior. Ask people where they work, why they are travelling, why they are carrying certain items, assess if it makes sense, and watch for behavioral cues. For any individual, this "interview" can take anywhere from 15 seconds to several hours. Certain people who are deemed higher risk get more attention. Most pilots don't fall into this category, and can also easily be pre-screened.

[Shep69]

There's a pretty simple solution.

Use the resources to look for explosives.

Use the resources to profile, target behaviour and target terrorist related activities (and those who might have terrorist ties).

Accept the fact that someone is ALWAYS going to slip through the cracks at some point and have a real plan which is prepared for this eventuality.

Stop being silly about targeting objects which are no more or less dangerous than anything available on the aircraft. Box cutters and knives are no more suitable weapons than anything carried or able to be improvised on any aircraft.

And get away from the nanny state feel good solution of villifying tools.

[deptrai]

In a daring and brilliant piece of undercover journalism, the daily fail once revealed the previously completely unknown fact that deadly swiss pocket knives are sold airside at Zurich Airport. "A 6cm toughened blade"! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396327/Airport-security-farce-Deadlier-knives-used-9-11-sold-duty-free-taken-London-flight.html)

These news reports about the CX pilot who got stopped just confirms to me there is a lot of hysteria, which only distracts from the real issue (security).

[Max Reheat]

Deptrai,

Excellent post.

Thank you... Max

[main_dog]

Mindless repeat searches of everyone in exactly the same way every time is not the best approach to security.

Deptrai, please stop bringing sense to this discussion... we are talking Heathrow security here!

:ok:

[sodapop]

Canis primis,

Exactly correct. The security at FRA has adopted an explosive tag/strip check for staff and crew. Baggage, belts and hands are swiped and then the tag is monitored for any explosives. Green = pass, Red = baggage scan.

Why the rest of the free world refuses to embrace and use technology is beyond me.

Swiss army knives sold airside? Try to pry open the cockpit door with a 6cm blade.

Mandi,
Soda

[Frogman1484]

Try and do it with nail clippers!!!!:ugh:

[pacific_sunrise]

Recently came out of LHR. Security did a great job, I thought...quick, professional and thorough! As crew, as long as we know our limits and allowances, they do their job accordingly!

[Tourettes_Guy]

Reading this to find out more about the "management" that we are presently negotiating with for our lives.
It doesn't look like ethics or values are words in their vocabulary.

Must read for everyone:

The 49ers II -The Rest of the Story - Kindle edition by John Warham. Professional & Technical Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com. The 49ers II -The Rest of the Story - Kindle edition by John Warham. Professional & Technical Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

Found this thread on another page. Apologies for not making due reference to the author. Point being the following.

Reference to 'negotiating with for our lives'.i always thought that keeping knives etc off aircraft had a great deal to do with 'lives'? Funny how monetary gain, conditions and service etc, however justified warrant this kind of statement. Let's not go into ethics and values....... As PIC or FO you're entrusted and respected for your skills and professionalism. Demonstrate it by setting an example! It appears that the carriage of a prohibited article is not a problem as long as it's carried by a pilot, irrespective of the regulatory requirements. I'm certain almost all professional pilots would soon land their plane at the nearest airfield if they heard a pax had a knife in their cabin baggage at 35,000 feet. Or would they first seek clarification as to whether the pax was a pilot or not?

[Flying Lawyer]

deptraibut there is room for improvement, and I think that is a more interesting debate, in general, than to consider the facts of some particular case where someone got caught carrying something he/she shouldn't.
I'm not a professional pilot but FWIW I agree there is scope for discussion (and a review) of airport security procedures.
However, the facts of this incident remain of interest to me. In particular, what item(s) the pilot was carrying and why someone saw fit to arrest him, with the consequent inconvenience to 260+ passengers and the rest of the crew.
The impact of being arrested should not be under-estimated. For some people, it is a way of life. For the rest of us, it would be an alarming and worrying experience - whatever the eventual outcome.

pacific_sunrise
Recently came out of LHR. Security did a great job ..... As crew, as long as we know our limits and allowances, they do their job accordingly!
As crew?
In your Profile, you claim:
Current a/c Type (Pilots only)
"Boeings..Airbus...Lockheed"
Occupation
"crew" Current on all three? :confused:
I can't help but wonder if you actually work in security. If my suspicions are ill-founded, I look forward to learning from your contributions to the technical threads. I won't hold my breath - in another forum (discussing security) you claim to be CC.


Tourettes_Guy Reading this to find out more about the "management" that we are presently negotiating with for our lives. We?
Three posts since 2010, two of which are on this thread.
Why are you pretending to fly for Cathay? :confused:


(Assuming, of course, that pacific_sunrise and Tourettes_Guy are actually two different people. ;) )

[pacific_sunrise]

Flying Lawyer

Besides commenting on profiles, do you have anything else to say?
Thanks for the compliment! I am in Aviation and do take security and safety seriously, so guilty as charged!
As for Tourette's Guy, to answer your suspicion, no we are not the same person....he seems to know his stuff...

[Tourettes_Guy]

Is somebody getting sensitive?:=. Probably know as much about A/C operations as your goodself. Certainly know more about the various international conventions, regulatory compliance and safeguards intended to protect all who enjoy careers in aviation and the pax who allow us to work in this profession by trusting us with their lives.

I also learnt to read at a very early age and don't always feel the need to make unnecessary responses to some of these threads. Didn't know you had to log in every time. Maybe you might want to read a few more security regs, they do after all apply to pilots too. Fair comment me thinks, as I've never been stopped or lifted passing through a security check point. Maybe it's time to hibernate again.

[main_dog]

For us line folk who habitually tromp through security at least once a day, the bewildering differences in security requirements at different ports are already confusing. In some places ipad and laptop must come out for security, but not in others. In some, liquids must come out too. Even within the EU, in some states crews are actually exempt from the 100ml liquid limit, but not in others.

At one extreme, FRA is very user-friendly to crewmembers and as Sodapop says most times the walk through metal detector and suitcase X-ray is not even required, at the other extreme, well, there's LHR. :( I'm pretty sure if you polled pilots worldwide you would see Heathrow close to the bottom.

I think Deptrai and Shep were on track with the way security should evolve. No need to go as far as the Americans who allow armed pilots on board perhaps, but I do like their known crewmember concept. If you can establish that the chap or chapess is indeed pilot X at company Y, and as such has been properly pre-screened as a reliable and responsible individual, then a different security criteria should apply. It's always a bit surreal when said pilot X gets nail clippers confiscated, or reprimanded like a child for forgetting a 50ml tube of toothpaste outside the infamous plastic baggie, and then goes on to fly a heavily-laden airliner over a major city.

The one-size-fits-all model of security simply makes no sense, is cost and time-consuming and should change. Won't hold my breath though.

[VR-HFX]

Flying Lawyer

I think you have the answer in the replies from p_s and T_G posted 6 minutes apart, although they could still in fact be separate personalities.:sad:

[Flying Lawyer]

VR-HFX

Yes, and only 13 minutes apart last time. :)

p_s

Not at the moment, thank you. I am in Aviation
I didn't suggest otherwise. Many people are 'in aviation' in a wide variety of roles. Why not admit that yours is security?
BTW, you forgot to delete 'crew' when you amended your Profile. ;)

As for Tourette's Guy, to answer your suspicion, no we are not the same person....he seems to know his stuff... :rolleyes:


T_GCertainly know more about the various international conventions, regulatory complianceIf you mean those relating to security, I agree. Maybe it's time to hibernate again.Or perhaps to stop pretending to be something you are not and use one username to offer your opinions as someone who works in the security field.

[VR-HFX]

FL

Well said. I think Main Dog best summed it up. My experiences and views were summed up earlier in the thread.

Luckily in my declining years I spend more time on the other side of the field and do not often have to pass through the pax terminals with the cattle.

The whole airport security industry is just that...an industry...that is unlikely to give up it's multi billion dollar rice bowl without a fight.

Personally I can understand why a lot of the mid-career pilots in many major carriers are becoming more and more disaffected with the career they have chosen. Years of sacrifice only to be subject to a proctologists report every time they go to work.

Not to mention being treated by management as overpaid muppets. Interesting that CX management has singled out the pilot group for no pay rises for a number of years while succumbing the FA union ( and good on the FA union...thinking of joining myself).

It's a race to the bottom but I guess that applies across society as the pyramid upon which economic theory is based has become inverted.

I enjoy your work.:ok:

[pacific_sunrise]

Gosh..you crack me up! TG, I hope your are around to reply immediately just to mess with their minds!
Sorry, I can't take the 'crew' out..will stay true to myself. I get many who say I am good with my knowledge on security and safety, but your remarks really does bring it home, thanks again...
Now getting back to the main topic, I believe the poor FO made a silly unintentional mistake, hope he is pardoned for it...he is a decent chap, I've been informed!
Once again, LHR were good this time I came through..yes, they are considered to be a pain in the A*** and that's coz it is the most irritating way to go through security dragging bags, getting on and of the crew bus...and then they do drugs
Tests, their equipment is a tad different compared to what we are used to, pretty high tech really...but hey, 'crew' don't like to be checked...so whinge away.. So what if it's to keep everyone safe....

[VR-HFX]

P_S

Just gone on the ignore list. Get some help. Soon.

[pacific_sunrise]

Ignored? What have I done now? :rolleyes:
Guess Honesty is not the best policy for some...
You'll attacked my profile, said nothing about my post and then ignore me? The truth hurts I guess... Anyways, I'm over and out on this one...Rejoice!

[Flying Lawyer]

VR-HFX

Agree re main dog's post. Excellent.


p_r Gosh..you crack me up! TG, I hope your are around to reply immediately just to mess with their minds! When you find yourself in a hole, it's usually best to stop digging.
For someone who prides himself upon his familiarity with security matters, you are extraordinarily naïve. Surely by now it should have occurred to you that I have worked out who you are (both your usernames) and your role? Sorry, I can't take the 'crew' out..will stay true to myself.I enjoy PPRuNe and am not going to jeopardise my membership by saying any more here, tempting though it is. However, if you wish to PM me, feel free. I'll then reveal what I know and perhaps you'll explain why you persist in claiming to be crew.

I believe the poor FO ..... is a decent chap, I've been informed! I've also been told the pilot is well regarded but if your informant has told you he's an FO then I suggest you seek a more reliable informant.

[pacific_sunrise]

I do apologize, not an FO...

[main_dog]

Sometimes security really does feel this silly...

http://youtu.be/AHZISoNlqAA

AHZISoNlqAA

[Pucka]

Sometimes security really does feel this silly...

http://youtu.be/AHZISoNlqAA

I came through LHR yesterday as pax.no belt or coins and air sole boots.A frame protested so I was put through the most thorough security I have ever had in nearly 40 years of flying..in fact it was a vertical massage where indeed my security agent almost succeeded in giving me a complete medical though I wasn't asked to cough.this was accomplished in public and was actually a little embarrassing if not slightly threatening.he even went through my pockets asking me to separate my cash notes from my folded roster. Meantime my rucksack, containing 2 metal biros, a plug and adaptor, a pair of needle pliers that were forgotten items....went without notice?WTF!!!! I then, out of interest, as I waited for my Doc Martins to come off the belt, asked what the reaction would be if they had found an item of metal cutlery,a knife per say, from CX, that I had intended to return having inadvertently removed it from a previous flight....answer..immediate arrest!!!... This is now the ridiculous state this "industry"has descended to...divine comedy doesn't even get close...!

[deptrai]

Sometimes security really does feel this silly...

http://youtu.be/AHZISoNlqAA

you lightened up my mood :) at the same time, I have to say I've never personally met an unreasonable security guard, those I met all seem to do an effort to make individual decisions despite silly rules, and I got to keep knives, toy gun, and cough syrup ("because it's christmas", absolutely lovely, no sarcasm), I discarded numerous water bottles, yoghurt, some nail clippers and one particularly expensive shower gel without hard feelings, and when I very rarely get the pat down treatment, they look apologetically at me and say "not your fault, it's the random beep", and I worry about the discomfort for that person. Heathrow is a particular headache though.

[PT6Driver]

Like all aspects of life you get good bad and indifferent.
As crew we welcome consistency, but the reality is that's never going to happen, individual states will allways have different security agendas and will acordingly apply different regulations.

What annoys and upsets are the power hungry, who I have to say are in the small minority. But they are the ones who ruin your day and who you remember. Like in all walks of life you remember and talk about the rude and nasty, rarely do you go out of your way to praise the good.

Is there realy any need to shout loudly in public at a visiting crew that they should know by now that at Xxxx (where incidentally they have never been before) all phones have to be put in the blue trays, or whatever other rule they are having a crackdown on this week. :mad:

What happened to staff lanes? At a lot of uk airports this is mixed in with pax and in some cases the priority card holding pax have priority over crew! :ugh:

Sadly the calls for common sense will go unheeded as costs are driven down and ever more stringent rule based processes are implemented.

[Dan Winterland]

https://youtu.be/jvoqfddpuu8

[India Four Two]

What happened to staff lanes? At a lot of uk airports this is mixed in with pax and in some cases the priority card holding pax have priority over crew!


PT6Driver,
You've reminded me of when I was in the "mixed" security lane at a U.S. airport. A CC asked if she could go ahead. I said:
"No, because I am late for my flight."
"Well, you can't leave without us."
"True, but you can leave without me."

[PT6Driver]

Is there any update on this?
I may have missed something but I understood that he was bailed until May. Has there been a court appearance or extension?

[Flying Lawyer]

No extension.
No charges.
No criminal proceedings.
File closed.

[PT6Driver]

FL
Thanks for the update.
However this does raise other questions, principally why the police decided an arrest was the appropriate response to this matter?
The CPS (I believe) decide whether or not to take the case forward, but this seems to have been massive overreaction by the arresting officer.
Again though it is easy to try and second guess the man (or) woman on the spot.

[JammedStab]

No extension.
No charges.
No criminal proceedings.
File closed.

Good news. It appears that what the pilot did was not criminal. But, in order to make absolutely sure that this doesn't happen to anyone of us, possibly due to an overzealous officer.....

....more details would be welcome so that the same doesn't happen again.

So what exactly was he carrying?

[ACMS]

So how come there has been no "please by guided accordingly" letters from the Boeing CP? Surely he could be passing on important info like this to his crew SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN......

[geh065]

So how come there has been no "please by guided accordingly" letters from the Boeing CP? Surely he could be passing on important info like this to his crew SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN......

You need to be told by the CP not to put knives in your carry-on?

[ACMS]

We don't know any details about what happened do we?
The guys been let off so it must have been a storm in a tea cup.
It would be nice for the CP to at the very least provide some guidance so others can't make the same mistake........

[PT6Driver]

The implications of this go beyond just 1 airline, so I was surprised that the mods moved the thread hear.
I was hoping that FL would be able to update on what happened.
What was he carrying?
Why did the police arrest?
Why did the CPS decide to quietly drop the whole thing? Which is not the same as being let off.

The power of arrest is a very important one and should not be open to abuse by overreacting police officers.
If that is the case it is important that they are held accountable for their actions.

As professional pilots agreed we should have enough sense not to carry swords, bayonets, bladed weapons etc in our baggage. However it seems very likely that this is not what occurred here.
What may be legally carried elsewhere, may be a criminal offence in the uk. Not all states are equal.

[Oasis]

Police abusing their power, nothing new here...

[Shot Nancy]

I think you should all stop digging around here and go back to smelling the roses.

[RHEINHARD]

Very clever Nancy. Sweet smelling roses require pruning after all.