A hole in the security cheese?

[hoss183]

So, I took a flight as PAX yesterday from Belgrade to Frankfurt. Busy a/c all seats filled, usual shortage of overhead locker space.
Just as boarding was complete, and as our slot time passes there was something going on a few rows ahead. CC had called up a pax from the rear to look/talk with the pax in front. After some time they announced that the pax was ill and an ambulance had been called.
Said pax was removed and his hold luggage removed. The CC then set about looking for his carry-on, but only a few rows either side of where he had been sat. They asked only these few rows to identify their bags.
Now only a few minutes earlier people had been going right up and down the plane looking for stowage spots.
This strikes me as a hole in the system. A vector that could be exploited.
I did spend the rest of the flight a tad worried when i would hear the B of the Bang. It did seem a bit suspicious to fall sick just after boarding, but before the doors were closed.
Comments...

[South Prince]

a full baggage carry-on recognition should be carried out, your OM should state that.

[Herod]

I think you're right there, but let's not go giving the "baddies" ideas.

[Capt Fathom]

Carry-On baggage is screened! :confused:

[hoss183]

Yes carry-on is screened. But if that's the ONLY line of defence, then the cheese is only 1 hole thick. Introduce a lazy or compromised screener and the hole appears.
As SP said, there should have been a cabin wide recognition really.

[aterpster]

hoss183:

Yes carry-on is screened. But if that's the ONLY line of defence, then the cheese is only 1 hole thick. Introduce a lazy or compromised screener and the hole appears.
As SP said, there should have been a cabin wide recognition really.

If you want belts and suspenders in all aspects of airline security, I suggest a different mode of transportation for your peace of mind.

[2Planks]

But hold baggage is also screened, so if that has to come off then so should hand baggage, a confirmatory check being the only way to determine that it has been done.

[Methersgate]

PR 434 was a case where a bomb was left by a passenger who disembarked at an intermediate stop. More cheese would be welcome.

[chips101]

My understanding in the UK. If a pap leaves the flight on the ground at anytime for any reason the whole aircraft has to be disembarked and a "security sweep" of the cabin carried out regardless of any bags or not.

[Binder]

The actions taken by the crew in the OP's post are standard procedure and DFT approved in at least one very large European LoCo.

You'll never satisfy everyone so please can we just leave the info' trail alone now.

[boardingpass]

The most comprehensive way would be for everyone to disembark, do a full security search, then reboard everyone... maybe 40 mins or so for short haul, an hour or so for long haul... Offloading someone for illness or scared of flying or drunk is fairly common to be honest so the current procedures seem fine in normal circumstances unless there is sufficient reason by the captain to do a full cabin search

[JW411]

".......an hour or so for long haul"

You ARE joking of course?

[boardingpass]

JW are you saying longer or quicker? I'm usually optimistic but say it takes 10 mins to organise busses or terminal holding area and ground staff, about 15 mins to disembark, 10 mins to security search, 25 mins to reboard (plus or minus 10 if you're re-checking boarding cards/passports or not). I'm sure in reality everything usually takes longer than hoped.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

In your dreams! - well over an hour for a short haul loco last week ...

[fokker1000]

hoss183.
If you weren't happy, then why not get off?

[Di_Vosh]

hoss183

Mate, the "security cheese" as you describe it has more holes in it than a colander! There are countless ways to get "items" onboard aircraft.

You can thank your lucky stars that most "items" smuggled onto aircraft these days are in powder form and are for human consumption.

It really isn't that suspicious for people to "fall sick" just after boarding an aircraft, disembarking sick (or other reason) people is just another day at the office. Even in the Dash-8 I personally do it around every 3-6 months.

DIVOSH!

[ExXB]

Shouldn't this be in JB?

[T250]

I did spend the rest of the flight a tad worried when i would hear the B of the Bang. It did seem a bit suspicious to fall sick just after boarding, but before the doors were closed.

So you were so worried that you just sat there and said nothing. Good for you.

[spiney]

EK 007 DXB-LHR last week. Emirates had to offload a passenger with some some medical condition - we were still at the gate, just before pushing back. It was a pretty full A380 and the Captain optimistically suggested a 30 minute delay - it was 1hr 45mins.

[hoss183]

Thanks for moving the thread here. Its hardly a pax issue, it something that affects crew and the application of SOPs. The intention was to get feedback on that from crew and to make people think about this vector.

[T250]

Thanks for moving the thread here. Its hardly a pax issue, it something that affects crew and the application of SOPs. The intention was to get feedback on that from crew and to make people think about this vector.

:confused:

It is a pax issue, it was caused by a pax which then impacted other pax, crew and the airline. Why should it not be moved here. Crew forum members should check not only their forum but this one, after all the pax are the ones paying their wages. :hmm:

[Peter47]

Baggage reconciliation (hold or cabin) assumes that people are unwilling to die for their cause. Sadly that does not appear to be the case any longer and whilst we definitely require effective screening I wonder if the concept is still valid.

The US has never adopted baggage reconciliation for domestic flights (which I forgot when I volunteered to be bumped & my bag went to my destination) and relies on screening.

[WHBM]

The main upside of baggage reconciliation is a considerable reduction in mishandled bags, and if they still have been, knowing where they are.

[wiggy]

TBH just caught up with this thread - I get the impression the OP thinks they have stumbled upon something new and TBH I'm not sure why.

This "vector", if you choose to call it that, has been discussed at nauseam mainly behind closed doors, and companies may well have detailed SOPs to cover it.

..and above all Peter47 is right when you've got people who are willing to die for their cause then you require effective physical screening.