Swiss Security Gap

[Kerosene]

Recently flew on a LX A330 from ZRH to the Middle East and was puzzled by a procedure conducted by the cabin crew before a stopover which poses a potential security hazard.

Seats of continuing passengers were marked with little signs "occupied/besetzt" which were attached to five cm long and two mm thick sharp pointy needles. The needles were stuck into the headrest area of the passenger seats. When the procedure was completed around half of the passenger seats were fitted with the signs.

The needles can make a dangerous weapon in the hands of determined attackers. I brought this to the attention of a cabin crew member who agreed but said that there was no complete security anyway.

What is the point in asking our passengers not to bring comparatively harmless nail clippers in their hand luggage when we are distributing potentially dangerous items in the cabin?

I asked the cabin crew member to report my complaint to his superiors but on the return flight I found that same procedure still being used. Stickers could do the same job without posing a hazard.

I hope this posting will come to the attention of people at Swiss and will bring an end to the distribution of needles in the passenger cabin.

Rgds

[theblipdriver]

in this case - how can you give passengers KNIVES to eat? isn't it dangerous? or you could attack the pilots and pop their eyes out with a teaspoon?

honestly, i think there are things in aviation which are more a safety concern than just some needles.

cheers,
al

[what_goes_up]

Hi Kerosene
I personally don't think it is a security problem. But nevertheless I will bring it to our chief pilots and security guys attention.
Hope you feel safer on your next LX flight!!

Bottoms up mate :)

[arcniz]

In this context, the concept of 'weapons' in the cabin has multiple levels of meaning.

One level is "able to do mortal harm". Fists, feet, neckties, etc. fall into this category, along with weapons like guns and knives that project harm over distance or increase its efficiency.

Another level is "able to invoke fear", and by doing so to change the course of events.

Perhaps thanks to Holywood, many people would be more essentially fearful of being savaged by a fistful of conspicuous needles than of being atomized in a nuclear millisecond.

Theater is an essential component of successful terrorism.

So a few less props surely wouldn't hurt from an anti-terror POV.

But there is a threshold to change anything.

The main argument for not changing LX cabin procedure would likely be: "because that's how we've always done it. It is cheap, and neat, and it works." So the real issue is whether the not- clearly-envisioned risk is valued high enough to overcome 'reluctance to change' (in view of modified criteria), plus the financial hit of writing off all those old seat needles.

LX could invest a few hundred francs, with hungry ETH students consulting on the cheap, to develop a string of scenarios about what smart, vicious, ballistic maniacs can do with a quantity of not so very long needles. That might set the point in clearer perspective.

[near enuf is good enuf]

Cabin security is a joke as long as SLF are alowed to carry glass bottles onto any flight !

[Notso Fantastic]

Rather than start a new thread......Reports on local radio this morning that a German journo has made a cheap 'name' for himself smuggling 2 mobile phones packed with fake 'explosive' on BA FRA-LON. What a 'hero'!

[arcniz]

You're right about the bottles, near_enuf -- in more ways than one.

What a PITA this all is!

The seemingly inevitable result from the gravitation of these incidents and the underlying circumstances is toward profiling, profiling, profiling. All there is to know about everybody, digitized for perpetuity. Orwell would be so proud - and so sad.



-
With them the Seed of Wisdom did I sow,
And with my own hand labour'd it to grow:
And this was all the Harvest that I reap'd--
"I came like Water and like Wind I go.''

- and some megabytes remain to mark the spot

[Kerosene]

First of all, thank you those who have acknowledged a passenger's concern. True, there is no one hundred percent security on any flight. However, should we just shrug our shoulders over the fact, or can we do something to improve the security of our industry? We are in an industry that is, more than ever before, under the watchful eyes of the public. The media, in a sad way, is exploiting weaknesses of our security systems for a story. What's behind this is the public's concern for their safety when they board a flight, and as we have seen our industry is highly vulnerable to the passenger's perceptions. Just one weakness, one incident, one thing that will lead to the perception that we are not doing whatever we can to make our flights secure and the industry will suffer the consequences. I do not mean to isolate LX in this context. All airlines are in the same boat here, what hurts one will hurt another. And no, security is not a joke as one poster has mentioned. Perhaps we will have to arrive at a stage where we will have no glass bottles on board anymore one day. If we ask our passengers not to bring things that might pose a risk we should be doing all we can to show that we take security very seriously. Ok, as someone has put it, there might be more urgent concerns than needles. If so, which are those, and why not bring them up (here, for instance)? It may take many small steps, but only awareness will take us there.

Please keep me posted on the reaction at Swiss over the needles.

Rgds and Thanks

[Rollingthunder]

Done a few flights recently. Some flight deck doors still unmodified. On all flights (5) drivers and flight attendants were in and out continually. Plastic cutlery in first. Nikon swabbed for explosive residues or breezed through with no examination. Single cell flashlight spotted and questioned.

Seems to me the only practical way of flying is to be vigilant yourself and be prepared to act if it becomes necessary. Don't depend on others for your personal security - anywhere - anytime.

[126.9]

Hey, I recently flew on an aircraft that had heaps of potential weapons on board! I noticed at least 8 fire extinguishers attached to the door areas! They also had boiling hot kettles and water, knives & forks, crash axes, heavy kitchen utensils, large trolleys on wheels, first aid kits with needles, portable oxygen bottles, draeger hoods, heavy Jep bags, glass bottles, cups, saucers, plates, glasses and tons more... :confused:

[Kerosene]

126,9

So in your view is on board security nothing but a joke? All actions to prevent passengers bringing some items nothing but a marketing campaign because all that is needed would be found on board anyway?

Even so, security "marketing" will only work if it is looks like a serious effort. What would you suggest? Show resignation over the endless potential for weapons on board? Display ignorance and hand out items with the same potential for harm that you have previously had to take off your passengers at check in due to "the rules".

What will that do to passenger's perception?

arcniz,

enjoyed reading your posting.

I am surprised by the amount of "Reluctance to change" and resignation expressed by others here.

Kero

[brockenspectre]

I don't think it ever hurts to bring to "the system's" attention any matter which you, as a sensible, precautionary, adult considers a potential security risk. It is then for "the system" to take this info, consider it appropriately and act or not act. We have to accept that "the system" (be it of an airline, a City/Wall Street bank, an airport, a high-rise building in a capital city, nuclear power-plant, toxic waste disposal unit, pharmaceutical company) has the knowledge and expertise to assess risk in its environment and the willingness to take positive action to minimise/eliminate harm to the general public.

The problem highlighted by the rash and in some cases ludicrous reactions to 9/11 at airports and with airlines is that the majority of the travelling public and flight/cabin crew do not see the majority of new measures as enhancing or in any way improving security on board.

Before anyone works at an airport/airline they should be stringently scrutinised by the host country's security/police service and given a clearance which should include fingerprinting. Security cards, with photos no older than 6m and fingerprints, then issued. Random comparison of the prints on the cards and the person carrying the card to be undertaken at all airports/airlines by an external agency. A mismatch means immediate arrest for the carrier of the card and the person to whom it was issued and their suspension for all time from work with any airport/airline.

For the travelling public, in the UK at least there seemed to be little problem with the one small bag (preferably see-through) to carry on - in fact in various queues I found myself in people were almost vying to have the most effective bag for security folks to check! Dutyfree alcohol and other glassware purchases are the next problem - in the right hands the smallest item (or no item at all) can be deadly. So why not a specific lockable overhead bin for duty-free only? pax to be relieved of purchases while waiting in lounge? then the chance of a drunk angry person waving their own giant bottle around is lessened...

Nothing will prevent a determined criminal/terrorist from attempting to pursue their aims, but like all good crime prevention, all measures introduced should be to make it so tedious that airports and airlines and other likely targets are just too difficult. Downside? non key targets might be selected but when the aim of the current situation appears to be global terror this is less likely.

As with everything, there is one truth. Security measures that should be in place may not be in all sorts of industries and it is vital that the whistle-blower in those industries has a means by which his/her genuine concerns can be raised to appropriate authorities - often the larger the organisation the less possible it is for someone down the "food chain" to air concerns!

JMHO

:)

[126.9]

Well, in my opinion yes; aviation security right now is nothing but a pathetic, sick joke! Airport queues have doubled in length over the past 13 months, and I passed through 3 MAJOR European hubs and one MAJOR US hub with a pair of scissors in my flight-bag (unknowingly) without it being detected. Then upon my return, when the US security personnel found it in my bag, they confiscated it, bagged it and gave it to the red-cap who promptly returned it to me along with a bunch of other sharp objects belonging to various crew members...? And I speak funny and hold a dodgy foreign passport too!

When the aircraft is on fire; we don't jettison the engine, we put out the fire. Those aircraft last year were not flown into buildings by a knife or a pair of scissors. The problem is people and not sharp objects. When we all have the guts to look the REAL problem in the face, then on-board security might stand a chance. But until then, in my eyes: yes Mr Kerosene, it's a bloody great farce!

[Kerosene]

126,9

Ok, say we have the guts to face the REAL problem - people. Yes, a pair of scissors or needles will do no harm if you can guarantee that no one will board your plane who has plans to use them in a vicious way.

But - how can you ensure that? The way the industry is set up it is not a private flying club with carefully chosen members. Everyone can buy a ticket and fly. There has been a lot of talk about profiling. Fact is that it doesn't exist as yet.

In the meantime, what should we do? Capt.PPrune has pointed out in the airport security thread that the way to go is challenging people professionally at the gate. El Al has been doing this for many years and I admit that I have felt hasseled by their methods of interrogation, but at the same time it became clear that there was an absolute commitment to security in this airline, no fooling around there.

On the Swiss flight to the Middle East, none of this was in place. I hope that explains my concerns regarding the needles.

[PFLsAgain]

On a recent KLM flight from Cape Town to Amsterdam via Johannesburg there was a crew change at Jo'burg. The cockpit door was left wide open and a number of us passengers, me included, wandered up to (but not inside) the cockpit to gawk at all the gadgets etc. Fascinating to this PPL, but I did wonder at the time how come no-one challenged us. We could easily have got inside had we so been inclined. A member of the ground crew pushed past us at one point to complete a check list in the cockpit but didn't seem bothered by us. Most of the one hour stop-over time we were the only occupants of the entire area!

Security risk?