Qantas pilots refuse shoe security check

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Originally Posted by Dutch Roll

'rules are for the strict adherence of fools and the guidance of the wise'.

I wonder which category the screening staff lay in

You have to screen everyone. As (was it B A Lert?) was saying, it really can't be that hard to get your hands on a QF uniform and an ASIC if you really wanted to. (to take advantage of a "No pilot screening" process.)

Yes there are gaps in security, but that doesn't mean we say "Stuff it, let's not bother with this screening business". After all we all lock our front doors despite the ease of a burglar smashing a window to break in.

I suspect in the next 10 years security screening will advance to make things easier to pax and crew alike. There is just too much money to be made if you come up with a product that speeds screening up. No doubt they'll come up with someone that result in no "off with the shoes mate" soon enough.

The people you need to blame for all this unfortunately killed themselves along with a whole lot of innocent people

[Taildragger67]

There's another side to this.

If pilots voluntarily, without being forced or asked at a general level, agree to be screened when asked at a security point (you'll note I do not use the word 'submit'), then it could be seen as a sign of leadership, as in "well we, who fly the aircraft, agree to be screened, then there is no excuse for any passenger to argue against being screened"; further it's a positive approach, rather than one where the pilots are seen as submitting to the screeners.

What's needed is a bit of communication from the security authorities to get the buy-in of all parties.

It might be a fine distinction, but such an approach places the power back in the pilots' hands (as in, saying that 'we will do this, if asked at the checkpoint'). It's like being married: you willingly agree not to go out and play away , it's not something forced upon you, even though the effect is the same.

But as has been said, there's probably more to this than what's in the SMH story. I shall await further facts with interest.

[Much Ado]

I dissagree,

The chances of a terrorist falsifying an ASIC/Company ID/uniform AND being able to bluff the other 11-15 members of 'his' crew are bordering on bizarre.

Even if in the remotest of chances if he makes it to the cockpit he will have no idea of the company SOPs/procedures...even if he is type rated on the aircraft.

If an airline has a sleeper tech crew member no amount of screening at the terminal will pick him out because he will have been with the airline for years and have no requirement to carry anything suspicious on board with him...merely wait for the unsuspecting crew member to go for a comfort break or knock him out with the crash axe and use the pax restraint kit to immobilise him...and then lock the bullet proof door so no one can interfere with his plans.

The type of screening that aircrew are being subjected to at the present time is a criminal waste of resources.

[Taildragger67]

Originally Posted by Much Ado

The type of screening that aircrew are being subjected to at the present time is a criminal waste of resources.

My thought is that by being proactive about it, you are no longer "being subjected to"; the power would no longer be them telling you to do it (and so having the power), but more the pilot voluntarily agreeing to it (and so having the power).

I also think the 'leading by example' case is pretty strong.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Originally Posted by Taildragger67

My thought is that by being proactive about it, you are no longer "being subjected to"; the power would no longer be them telling you to do it (and so having the power), but more the pilot voluntarily agreeing to it (and so having the power).
I also think the 'leading by example' case is pretty strong.

Probably as bizarre as a British citizen having explosives in the soles of his shoes and trying to ignite it.

On Sep 10, 2001 what did you think the probably was of 4 aircraft being hijacked and flown into buildings was?

Nothing is "bizarre" to these mentally ill people.

[Much Ado]

Professional aircrew have a responsibility to highlight the grotesque waste of resources.

Drug mules can secret best part of a KG of heroin in their anal cavity/stomach in condoms...if a terrorist decides to do the same with a kg of C4 you'd be happy for all pilots to be subjected to strip searches and the rubber glove treatment as a sign that it is OK for the pax to be so treated?

Treating aircrew as potential terrorists is a COMPLETE waste of resources...I have been a professional pilot for over 20 years...I am not the problem I am the solution.

Airport security did not fail on 911...the Central Intelligence Agency did.

Are they screening all train passengers in London or Madrid post the attacks there?

Do they screen all truck drivers?

NO!!!

We have been sold a pup by the DOTARS/Govt...empire building twats

[twiggs]

Originally Posted by Much Ado

I dissagree,

The chances of a terrorist falsifying an ASIC/Company ID/uniform AND being able to bluff the other 11-15 members of 'his' crew are bordering on bizarre.

Once again the point is being totally missed.
The false uniform in this scenario is only needed to get a weapon past security (if screening is relaxed for pilots).
After the weapon is through, the pilot disguise is not necessarily part of the remaining plot.

[Much Ado]

Is the crash axe?

Respectfully I would suggest you're missing the point.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

1> Pilot dress up through security unchecked.
2> Hands whatever bad item he has to mate who is pax
3> Walks back out through security.

[DEFCON4]

Weapon

I would suggest that the aircraft is the weapon.....as was evidenced by the Egypt Air incident.
The only person capable of commandeering an aircraft is an existing aircrew member.
This person can either be a sleeper or someone who has gone over the edge.
Airport screening cannot detect either.
I suggest that the airlines themselves are responsible for both scenarios through self monitoring of personnel.
A CC member with a CPL is also a possibility.
All have flight deck access.
None of the terrorists involved in 911 was employee of the airlines involved.
If wrong I am sure I will be corrected.
Perhaps the screening of crew should be done on the ground and at the entrance to the aero bridge.
You are certainly more visble to the pax on your aircraft.

[Much Ado]

1> Most places these days crew member's name checked off against (airline supplied) gen dec.
2> Operating tech crew have no requirement to wander back and forth through security.
3> A swipe style ID card with secure biodata including airline/rank/picture/licence number in concert with 1> would solve most identification issues.
4> Security to have computer link to responsible Aviation Authority data base to compare biodata information.
5> Many airports screen aircrew twice and passengers once...why?
6> Many airports moving screening to the gate rather than the terminal...making it infinitely more difficult for a fake pilot to succeed.

I have not suggested aircrew should NOT be screened enroute to their aircraft I have said

The type of screening that aircrew are being subjected to at the present time is a criminal waste of resources.

Just because something is theoretically possible is no reason to treat career aircrew with a long history as such as terrorists.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Gotta agree with MA here...I am screened 8 or 10 times a mth and am getting pretty sick of taking my shoes off and removing my reading glasses case from my nav bag and locking it in my hold bag (as happened at LHR recently) when I could be stripped naked and walk to the aircraft naked and still have the ultimate weapon at my disposal...185000kg of aircaft, pax and fuel.

Limited resources are being wasted checking me in this manner when it could all be so simple.

When travelling as a pax my passport is held up to a reader which brings up a world of potential data..like any outstanding traffic infringements (in Australia at least).

Why cannot similar technolgy be used to vet my entrance to my workspace?

Present security is clumsy and very hit and miss...for instance when my reading glasses case was removed from my nav bag by security staff they completely missed my spare ones...for 4 mths they missed a metal dinner knife which had fallen unnoticed into my nav bag....goodness knows how many times my navbag was sent through x ray machines in 6 countries in that 4 mths.

I have an ASIC card and a long history as a professional pilot vetted by my employer...all I ask is to be treated with some professional respect.

In London a crew bus picks up the entire crew at the slip hotel and transports us to a crew screening point and then to the aircraft...there is no chance of a fake crew member passing himself off and sneaking stuff to a passenger in the terminal...in fact with the exception of our home base we are always transported as a crew to and from the airport...which would be the same for all airlines away from home base...where is the opportunity for a terrorist to pass himself off as a crew member successfully?

[Lord Lucan]

Pass-A-Frozo

1> Pilot dress up through security unchecked.
2> Hands whatever bad item he has to mate who is pax
3> Walks back out through security.

Yes this is quite possible. The point is that there are about a squillion other ways of getting crap airside. And there are quite a few people get to pass unchecked.

How is your scenario any different from:

Bent Security staff hands illicit item to mate/pax

[pakeha-boy]

yanks find a solution....$200

,...this one has to top the list...the yanks are now trying to push/pursue a Registered/preferred traveller programme through.For approx $200,you get a security check ,to prove your not a terrorist,you get your ID card ,then you get to "speed through" the security checkpoints.....bloody lovely!!!

The problem....those that ply their trades at these airports,flight crew,Lame,s,and others,get to stand in line,scratching their nuts,looking for seagulls.I reckon 26yrs of checks,security checks,verified airline employment doesnt mean jack-poop anymore....

At every airport I go through ,thee seems to be a small fraternity of airline workers that are able to bypass a system,which is manadatory for Paxs,and all others that want to enter a secure area,and until there is one standard for all,this debate and the security of all airports will always be at risk....from anybody,ie the most suspicious to the poor bloke with the knee surgery.....unfair,but when you have a system with double triple standards,go figure.

So I reckon Ive flown at least a billion miles,so my advice....apply for the registered Pax Programme as you will almost certainly get to work on time without having to take your shoes off...PB

[Kanga767]

For approx $200,you get a security check ,to prove your not a terrorist,you get your ID card

I thought that's what an ASIC was?

K

[lowerlobe]

Just because there are other areas of security that are less than perfect ,it does not mean that we should create others.
Can any pilot here say that no pilot is capable of a terrorist act simply because of their job description.To use the argument that it is unreasonable to expect tech crew to go through security just because they are pilots and could use the crash axe if they so choose is ridiculous.
We are supposed to close loopholes or openings that individuals or terrorist groups would like or are able to exploit not create more .By all means close or do the best we can to limit any other areas of security risk whether that is from the catering trucks or whatever.
Why give anyone the chance to create more chaos just because some of you are offended by the suggestion that one of your colleagues could do something that 99.9999999999% of us would never do.

As I said before at the end of the day all they are asking you is to remove your shoes....is that so hard after all

[B A Lert]

Originally Posted by lowerlobe

As I said before at the end of the day all they are asking you is to remove your shoes....is that so hard after all

For some people, yes, especially when both feet are in the mouth as would seem to be often the case!!

[Chimbu chuckles]

Ok lowerlobe why, in your view, is not passenger screening being carried out on London trains?

if 99.99% of pilots are not a security issue why waste resources searching them when the .00001% who may be would not get past the type of security check that MA indicates above...a database screening for the correct crew members?

You'll be happy to undergo a strip/body cavity search?

99.9999999% of people would not transport explosives in such a way but by you logic we should still be searched.

It would be interesting to see how you would react if you were searched in this manner everytime you enter your workspace

[stiffwing]

Now that the Capts. name has been made public (elsewhere), it is hardly surprising that he is the one in question

[blueloo]

Stiffwing, yes maybe so, but at least someone made a bit of a stand. possibly not the right thing to do, but maybe if a few of us indicated a bit of 'unhappiness' at the situation rather than just rolling over, eventually (and this really is wishful thinking) the powers that be may create a policy after some thought, rather than just to satisfy public perceptions.

further if you did find the source with names, then you will have also read that there was a bit to do with floor cleanliness, and seating availability........ (maybe that was just there argument).


additionally, what type of weasil is the airport security bloke to release the names!