Security Nonsense
HH, I dips me lid to the professional pilots. I have enough to worry about with a 172 or Worrier!
This business with security is now taking on Catch 22 proportions.
"Can Pilots be trusted not to highjack their own aircraft?"
It would seem the answer is No!
I am concerned with the ease with which "flight crew" appear to enter secure areas for reasons mentioned before.
I suggest a better approach to security would be to check flight crew and staff IDENTITY. One could then perhaps assume that since they had passed an ASIO screening, they can be assumed not to be security risks. Otherwise, what are you paying $200 for?
My leatherman is in my headset bag, as is my lethal fuel drainer. The day I'm forbidden to carry it is the day I switch airports.
This business with security is now taking on Catch 22 proportions.
"Can Pilots be trusted not to highjack their own aircraft?"
It would seem the answer is No!
I am concerned with the ease with which "flight crew" appear to enter secure areas for reasons mentioned before.
I suggest a better approach to security would be to check flight crew and staff IDENTITY. One could then perhaps assume that since they had passed an ASIO screening, they can be assumed not to be security risks. Otherwise, what are you paying $200 for?
My leatherman is in my headset bag, as is my lethal fuel drainer. The day I'm forbidden to carry it is the day I switch airports.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish - you are ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT. I refrained from raising this aspect in my previous posts as there are still some sensitive, confidential aspects of what goes on. But at the end of the day - who cares if a airline pilot is carrying a leatherman (as an example) or any other sharp object if he is confirmed as being an authorised pilot for that flight prior to boarding (visually: name & photo checked on ASIC, name checked on manifest). Especially so given the presence of certain emergency equipment on the flight-deck that kinda makes something like a leatherman a tad insignificant.
I would have thought THAT is where the focus really should be...... but no..... too logical.....
I would have thought THAT is where the focus really should be...... but no..... too logical.....
And now, to top it all off, if the aeroplane's full I can't let the woman I've been married to for 10 years and who's borne me three children into the flight deck.
However, any QF tea lady or baggage handler is allowed access to the flight deck on staff travel - with the Captain's permission of course.
And, of course, on a two man aeroplane, if one of the crew goes for a slash, the other one could choose not to let them back in. With the bulletproof, bomb proof doors, who really needs a set of nail clippers anyway?
However, any QF tea lady or baggage handler is allowed access to the flight deck on staff travel - with the Captain's permission of course.
And, of course, on a two man aeroplane, if one of the crew goes for a slash, the other one could choose not to let them back in. With the bulletproof, bomb proof doors, who really needs a set of nail clippers anyway?
Last edited by DirectAnywhere; 9th Mar 2005 at 01:43.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: lapbandland
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been to New York about a dozen times armed with deadly one
inch long nail file on murderous clippers and snuck them thru.
Went to Maroochydore on a holiday- SPRUNG by super efficient
security zealot who gleefully snapped off the lethal weapon.
But still allowed to carry murderous clippers onboard.
Interestingly in New York I have never had to remove shoes,belt
or anything to pass thru detector, and yet Sydney almost always.
These detectors are obviously adjustable, San Francisco always
needs a full strip tease to get thru, but then they always were
a bunch of Boofta's
You can kill a planeload of people with the flick of a switch, but
you can't carry a toolman to fix anything on that plane.
Hopefully George Dubbya will gun down Osama eventually and
all the morons securing airports will go home.
inch long nail file on murderous clippers and snuck them thru.
Went to Maroochydore on a holiday- SPRUNG by super efficient
security zealot who gleefully snapped off the lethal weapon.
But still allowed to carry murderous clippers onboard.
Interestingly in New York I have never had to remove shoes,belt
or anything to pass thru detector, and yet Sydney almost always.
These detectors are obviously adjustable, San Francisco always
needs a full strip tease to get thru, but then they always were
a bunch of Boofta's
You can kill a planeload of people with the flick of a switch, but
you can't carry a toolman to fix anything on that plane.
Hopefully George Dubbya will gun down Osama eventually and
all the morons securing airports will go home.
Thread Starter
The worst aspect of all this is the lack of consistancy and therefore achieved outcome.
I don't accept either that the travelling public gains any confidence from seeing pilots being stripped of their wings and shoes or having their bags x-rayed. Most would accept pilots as being 'on their side', but seeing their ID cards being checked would make sense to them.
If you are boarding via an air bridge, then being screened is probably just a minor inconvenience. If you are boarding across the tarmac to a stand off bay, then tracking via the airport departure lounge can be a time consuming nuisance. At my home-base airport the crew room is airside. One has already breached 'security' simply by signing on; albeit by needing and using an access card to enter the area. After flight planning, etc. the crew now required to leave the airside crew room and proceed back outside via the departure lounge and screening to access the very same area. One presumably then returns to the crew room and collects bags etc. (Why carry them all the way round?) Meanwhile, all other non-crew staff enter the secure airside area, carrying whatever they like, totally unsreened and all with some level of access to the aircraft or its' load.
Eventually all these issues may be resolved, but why are aircrew being targeted specifically right now? A possible solution could lie in having company security checking entry of ALL staff. In the case of aircrew this could include any or all of ID tags, correct entry cards, flight details, etc.
As mentioned, the Leatherman that may be in your unscreened navbag isn't so relevant when you are seated next to a fireaxe and batton. And we do have security doors to the flightdeck.
If pilots need to be screened, then so also does everyone else who has access to aircraft. Until this can be achieved, pilots should be excluded from this 'very specifial' treatment.
PS Applehead. Can't resist... you certainly chose your moniker well!!
I don't accept either that the travelling public gains any confidence from seeing pilots being stripped of their wings and shoes or having their bags x-rayed. Most would accept pilots as being 'on their side', but seeing their ID cards being checked would make sense to them.
If you are boarding via an air bridge, then being screened is probably just a minor inconvenience. If you are boarding across the tarmac to a stand off bay, then tracking via the airport departure lounge can be a time consuming nuisance. At my home-base airport the crew room is airside. One has already breached 'security' simply by signing on; albeit by needing and using an access card to enter the area. After flight planning, etc. the crew now required to leave the airside crew room and proceed back outside via the departure lounge and screening to access the very same area. One presumably then returns to the crew room and collects bags etc. (Why carry them all the way round?) Meanwhile, all other non-crew staff enter the secure airside area, carrying whatever they like, totally unsreened and all with some level of access to the aircraft or its' load.
Eventually all these issues may be resolved, but why are aircrew being targeted specifically right now? A possible solution could lie in having company security checking entry of ALL staff. In the case of aircrew this could include any or all of ID tags, correct entry cards, flight details, etc.
As mentioned, the Leatherman that may be in your unscreened navbag isn't so relevant when you are seated next to a fireaxe and batton. And we do have security doors to the flightdeck.
If pilots need to be screened, then so also does everyone else who has access to aircraft. Until this can be achieved, pilots should be excluded from this 'very specifial' treatment.
PS Applehead. Can't resist... you certainly chose your moniker well!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: sydney
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyingfox was right the first time
well well WELL, it seems that DOTARS has pulled a swifty and now all pilots (and biscuit chuckers) will have to be screened. No more entering the aircraft via the apron.
Flyingfox, I have not had time to read through the posts on this thread since my last one, but am sure you would have retorted - and you would have been right. Sorry - I have been looking through the legislation for the past few months in anticipation of it commencing, but never did DOTARS suggest that all crew were to be screened. What a crock of absolute sh!t! I have just spent the best part of an hour writing a letter to the minister, which I will post in a separate thread so that all here can (if they wish) copy it, change any part they like and then send it in to the Minister, thier local member and senators, the Prime Minister and Attorney General. Bugger it, let's bombard them with all with letters until they see the error of thier ways.
I invite you all to copy my letter in the separate thread "screening of crew operating screened air services"
Apologies, again, flyingfox.
Flyingfox, I have not had time to read through the posts on this thread since my last one, but am sure you would have retorted - and you would have been right. Sorry - I have been looking through the legislation for the past few months in anticipation of it commencing, but never did DOTARS suggest that all crew were to be screened. What a crock of absolute sh!t! I have just spent the best part of an hour writing a letter to the minister, which I will post in a separate thread so that all here can (if they wish) copy it, change any part they like and then send it in to the Minister, thier local member and senators, the Prime Minister and Attorney General. Bugger it, let's bombard them with all with letters until they see the error of thier ways.
I invite you all to copy my letter in the separate thread "screening of crew operating screened air services"
Apologies, again, flyingfox.
MadFokker.
Well, with dotars audit today...
anyhow - sign on, proceed thru security in bne. Aircraft late, but whats it matter anyhow - still, made it to gate only 15mins before STD, due to security not allowing us forward in the line.
All fine until arriving back into tsv from unsecured port, with change of aircraft on minimum possible turnaround time...
Cant get in terminal, then through security, then cant get back onto new aircraft as gate locked. Cant get tsv ops, so call bne ops to organise someone to let us thru.
Ground crew let us through then go off to do their own work. Pilots experience same problem, aircraft suffers a further 20minute delay in addition to the extra 15minutes it took to go through security and through the terminal.
Now, good point raised by our ground crew. What is to happen when crew sign on before security even opens. Many signons are 30minutes before security open, its bad enough trying to get through customs/security back of the clock at BNE intl, let alone TSV at 5am.
What about places like Coffs etc...? I will do what i'm told, but it just seems very silly - and costly!?
Well, with dotars audit today...
anyhow - sign on, proceed thru security in bne. Aircraft late, but whats it matter anyhow - still, made it to gate only 15mins before STD, due to security not allowing us forward in the line.
All fine until arriving back into tsv from unsecured port, with change of aircraft on minimum possible turnaround time...
Cant get in terminal, then through security, then cant get back onto new aircraft as gate locked. Cant get tsv ops, so call bne ops to organise someone to let us thru.
Ground crew let us through then go off to do their own work. Pilots experience same problem, aircraft suffers a further 20minute delay in addition to the extra 15minutes it took to go through security and through the terminal.
Now, good point raised by our ground crew. What is to happen when crew sign on before security even opens. Many signons are 30minutes before security open, its bad enough trying to get through customs/security back of the clock at BNE intl, let alone TSV at 5am.
What about places like Coffs etc...? I will do what i'm told, but it just seems very silly - and costly!?
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget about leatherman's and nail clippers.
Yesterday at MML, I had to open my flight bag, empty my Jepps and Ops manual, and have them all scrutinised.
ME: "Can you explain to me how on Earth my ringbinders pose a security threat?"
Security Guard: " They are starting to hide knives in the spines of ring binders"
What I want to know is, when they will work out how to screen a terrorist for their ability to perform ' The Jedi Mind Trick' on an unsuspecting crew in order to get them to takeover the plane on the behalf of the terrorist...........
Yesterday at MML, I had to open my flight bag, empty my Jepps and Ops manual, and have them all scrutinised.
ME: "Can you explain to me how on Earth my ringbinders pose a security threat?"
Security Guard: " They are starting to hide knives in the spines of ring binders"
What I want to know is, when they will work out how to screen a terrorist for their ability to perform ' The Jedi Mind Trick' on an unsuspecting crew in order to get them to takeover the plane on the behalf of the terrorist...........
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly all over the place as well and find the Oz security screening the most intrusive of any airport in the world.They check everything. Not once have they looked at my ID, and with the size of the font on the card you would have to be superman to see if it were current or not. They always want to take the laptop out and pass it through separately. You can then fly across to NZ and all the normal checks will apply. Then back to Australia and you are treated in a demeaning fashion. I find Brisbane the worst, they must be under training or something. You can operate an all night flight and then be made to queue with the rest of the passengers to make your way through quarantine. An arriving Qantas crew will be shepherded through a separate channel for processing. This distinction is particularly annoying as I am also an Australian, just happen to work for a different carrier. I hope this thread might bring some much warranted attention to these over zealous workers.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CNS ...Worst
CNS has to be the worst port in Australia and the most inconsistent.You cannot take nail clippers with a 2.5 cm file on board but you can take knitting needles and a 5cm needle on board.When going thru the body scan my shoes will set off the alarm(in all Australian and international ports) ..RM's have a metal support in the arch.This does not happen in CNS.In conversation with one of the security girls I was told the baggage scanner is operated by the CNS Port Authority but the walk thru' is operated by DOTARS and it is checked once every two weeks for sensitivity.They are also the only people to check for aerosols(shaving cream)and umbrellas.They are certainly not employed for their people skills...It seems screaming at Japanese pax will make them understand english.The same screaming method is employed in BNE.
Welcome to Australia where the first people you meet tread water in the shallow end of the gene pool.
Welcome to Australia where the first people you meet tread water in the shallow end of the gene pool.
Bottums Up
Mrs Claret's youngest has a casual job collecting the recently departed, for a local undertaker.
On Saturday evening he was called to a job at Darwin International Airport. A passenger on an international flight, I think to Thailand, had deceased and the flight diverted into Darwin.
The undertaker team were met at a gate by an airline personnel and taken to the aircraft, where unscreened and with NO SECUTIRY CHECKS WHATSOEVER they were led onto the aircraft to retrieve the corpse.
Yet another example of "gotta security screen the operating crew but any one else is ok"!
On Saturday evening he was called to a job at Darwin International Airport. A passenger on an international flight, I think to Thailand, had deceased and the flight diverted into Darwin.
The undertaker team were met at a gate by an airline personnel and taken to the aircraft, where unscreened and with NO SECUTIRY CHECKS WHATSOEVER they were led onto the aircraft to retrieve the corpse.
Yet another example of "gotta security screen the operating crew but any one else is ok"!
Similar thread on the main "rumours and news" forum.
The most interesting posts related to a comment about Pilots being screened to make it less likely that they could be forced to take stuff airside under duress (for the sake of their family etc.).
There were also veiled references to other security "stuff" that even pilots wouldn't be told about.
I guess I can make some deductions about that, but I'm not going to post them.
The most interesting posts related to a comment about Pilots being screened to make it less likely that they could be forced to take stuff airside under duress (for the sake of their family etc.).
There were also veiled references to other security "stuff" that even pilots wouldn't be told about.
I guess I can make some deductions about that, but I'm not going to post them.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Here. Over here.
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt. Claret:
Seems like a big outbreak of commonsense to me.
1. The undertakers were there at the request of the airline.
2. They were escorted by airline staff.
3. They were not going to be travelling on the aircraft.
So where was the security risk?
Seems like a big outbreak of commonsense to me.
1. The undertakers were there at the request of the airline.
2. They were escorted by airline staff.
3. They were not going to be travelling on the aircraft.
So where was the security risk?