Congrats to the Pilots Who Stood Up For Reason
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of good discussion here but I think we all need to remember that it is not the screeners fault. They are the product of poorly thought out and implemented legislation.
As a pax I have no problem going through screening but as an AD operator I really empathise with the frustration of not only RPT crews but others who should be exempt from this lunacy ie, RFDS, Police aircraft. What the hell is the point of screening the individuals when they have access to all manner of prohibited items when they go on board.
THis has to be fought in a sensible way. Bagging the security at the screeing point is not the way to go and will only get those showing resistance into trouble and work against all of us in the long term. The Govt, DOTARS and travelling public need to wake up and realise that nothing detected on an aircrew at the screening point is going to make them any safer if the pilot is inclined to cause death or injury.
As I said before, it's a shame to boss of AFAP didn't use the opportunity to publicly highlight the idiocy of all this instead of sucking up to DOTARS.
Gaunty,
Sorry mate I didn't get to go to the meeting in Subi, can you pm me what the jist of it was?
As a pax I have no problem going through screening but as an AD operator I really empathise with the frustration of not only RPT crews but others who should be exempt from this lunacy ie, RFDS, Police aircraft. What the hell is the point of screening the individuals when they have access to all manner of prohibited items when they go on board.
THis has to be fought in a sensible way. Bagging the security at the screeing point is not the way to go and will only get those showing resistance into trouble and work against all of us in the long term. The Govt, DOTARS and travelling public need to wake up and realise that nothing detected on an aircrew at the screening point is going to make them any safer if the pilot is inclined to cause death or injury.
As I said before, it's a shame to boss of AFAP didn't use the opportunity to publicly highlight the idiocy of all this instead of sucking up to DOTARS.
Gaunty,
Sorry mate I didn't get to go to the meeting in Subi, can you pm me what the jist of it was?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope I'm not letting the team down here, but I have only ever been treated with courtesy and respect by screeners at BNE, ADL, CNS, MEL, HBA, DRW and SYD.Hopefully that is all I will ever experience.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope Borghetti reads this:
The other day I watched in bemusement while sitting in the cockpit of my Qantas jet as an engineer came into the cockpit with various tools of the trade. Screwdrivers. A leatherman. Various other implements, all of which would result in me being pulled aside in security and arrested if I tried to bring them on.
When I did my preflight checks I dutifully checked the various weapons, restraint items, and other equipment located around the cockpit.
Then later in the flight as the other pilot went out to the loo, I sat there thinking of the complete irony of the fact that I had utter and total control over what happened to the plane and its 250 passengers until I unlocked the door and let him back in.
Then the next day there was a furore in security as I was pinged for a small set of tweezers in the bottom of a toiletries bag which had been there for over 5 years of security screenings and had never moved.
Moronic. Completely moronic. I imagine American pilots would think much the same thing as they sat in their cockpit and checked their semi-automatic pistol or Taser. The frustration of pilots is completely understandable. And I wish I could share mppgf's experience with security screeners, but I can't.
The other day I watched in bemusement while sitting in the cockpit of my Qantas jet as an engineer came into the cockpit with various tools of the trade. Screwdrivers. A leatherman. Various other implements, all of which would result in me being pulled aside in security and arrested if I tried to bring them on.
When I did my preflight checks I dutifully checked the various weapons, restraint items, and other equipment located around the cockpit.
Then later in the flight as the other pilot went out to the loo, I sat there thinking of the complete irony of the fact that I had utter and total control over what happened to the plane and its 250 passengers until I unlocked the door and let him back in.
Then the next day there was a furore in security as I was pinged for a small set of tweezers in the bottom of a toiletries bag which had been there for over 5 years of security screenings and had never moved.
Moronic. Completely moronic. I imagine American pilots would think much the same thing as they sat in their cockpit and checked their semi-automatic pistol or Taser. The frustration of pilots is completely understandable. And I wish I could share mppgf's experience with security screeners, but I can't.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ostraaalya
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wanna make a couple of points.
- the act is the act. whilst it is there it applies to all people. Don't blame the security guards for applying the law they are told to apply.
- having said that, the security is only as good as the people opreating the machinery. Case in point the Leatherman that flew with me in my bag out of Sydney, but got picked up by security screening in Brisbane before the return flight. An expensive oversight that no doubt some brisbane security guard is enjoying.
- Respect needs to be earned. Personally I respect pilots for the years of training and experience, but there is no surer way to diminish your profession and eliminate any respect you have than to carry on in a public place, in uniform.
- Sorry to say it, but the argument you are safe cause you have an ASIC doesn't cut it. You get an ASIC by needing because of your job, and not having a criminal record (read the Act). Same as for Maritime Cards.
- what about the chick at sunglass hut who has a pair of scissors so she can unwrap deliveries, or the tradies refurbishing the book shop?
bottom line IMO - we should trust pilots (and we need to) and they go through a separate entrance without the screening. Until that happens, then like the rest of us you go through the screening, and you take off the RMs.
- the act is the act. whilst it is there it applies to all people. Don't blame the security guards for applying the law they are told to apply.
- having said that, the security is only as good as the people opreating the machinery. Case in point the Leatherman that flew with me in my bag out of Sydney, but got picked up by security screening in Brisbane before the return flight. An expensive oversight that no doubt some brisbane security guard is enjoying.
- Respect needs to be earned. Personally I respect pilots for the years of training and experience, but there is no surer way to diminish your profession and eliminate any respect you have than to carry on in a public place, in uniform.
- Sorry to say it, but the argument you are safe cause you have an ASIC doesn't cut it. You get an ASIC by needing because of your job, and not having a criminal record (read the Act). Same as for Maritime Cards.
- what about the chick at sunglass hut who has a pair of scissors so she can unwrap deliveries, or the tradies refurbishing the book shop?
bottom line IMO - we should trust pilots (and we need to) and they go through a separate entrance without the screening. Until that happens, then like the rest of us you go through the screening, and you take off the RMs.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to see why even if the laws stay the way they are, why security personnel can't just let pilots through with a wink and a nod despite what they see on x-ray. If they make a beep through the metal detectors give 'em a quick swipe with the magic wand and pass them on. Consider them 'not random enough' for the swab test and everyone is happy. But I guess they are taking their job as seriously as you guys are.
I've not passed security in full uniform before so never come accross any "Nazi" attitudes toward crew so maybe I'm living in dreamworld.
As an aside, who hires the Chubb? I've been told before (don't remember if it was in relation to Aus airports or not) that airport security (i.e. the security company) were hired by the airlines. Is this correct or does the airport itself hire them? Surely if its the airline then specific 'problem employees' with said "power trips" could be weeded out. I guess any direction in that line would be undermining the spirit of the legislation and bla bla bla.
Any way, my point was a bit of comradery would stop a lot of people here rubbing each other up the wrong way. Dream world again, I know.
I've not passed security in full uniform before so never come accross any "Nazi" attitudes toward crew so maybe I'm living in dreamworld.
As an aside, who hires the Chubb? I've been told before (don't remember if it was in relation to Aus airports or not) that airport security (i.e. the security company) were hired by the airlines. Is this correct or does the airport itself hire them? Surely if its the airline then specific 'problem employees' with said "power trips" could be weeded out. I guess any direction in that line would be undermining the spirit of the legislation and bla bla bla.
Any way, my point was a bit of comradery would stop a lot of people here rubbing each other up the wrong way. Dream world again, I know.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just go easy on the engineers.
We need to carry tools of the trade otherwise your aeroplane doesn't get fixed. We also spend all our time trying to keep them in the air rather than falling out of the air. A little bit like the pilots?
We are also subject to bag searches every time we enter the airport!
And yes I agree that it is a bit silly to be searching and restricting what the flight crew carry considering they have control of the aeroplane, at least most of the time.
We need to carry tools of the trade otherwise your aeroplane doesn't get fixed. We also spend all our time trying to keep them in the air rather than falling out of the air. A little bit like the pilots?
We are also subject to bag searches every time we enter the airport!
And yes I agree that it is a bit silly to be searching and restricting what the flight crew carry considering they have control of the aeroplane, at least most of the time.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I fail to see why even if the laws stay the way they are, why security personnel can't just let pilots through with a wink and a nod despite what they see on x-ray. "
That's the way it used to be done, until a couple of twits flew a couple of aircraft into a couple of buildings. These days there is too much scrutiny of the screening points by DOTARS and the media to get away with that sort of common sense. As various posters have pointed out, the current madness is not the fault of the screeners. They work under pressure from their company (who wants to keep the contract), the hirer (be it airport owner or airline, depending on the location) and the government (in the form of DOTARS). DOTARS use their staff in plain clothes to pass through the points with a test item to see if it is detected by the guards. If it is not, there are repercussions for that guard and the company. They have used airline staff in uniform before to test the process, there is no reason why they would not use someone in a pilot’s uniform to see how effective the screening is. Hence the lack of discretion.
To add to the frustration, different magnometers have different sensitivities, depending on brand, age and calibration. This is why your RMs will set off some and not others. Again, this is not the fault of the screeners, but the lack of standardization across the country’s airports, which also applies to the local procedures at various screening points and their different levels of tolerance.
In addition, the current labour shortage, low pay rates for security guards and the everlasting joy of being abused by pilots and passengers all day means that the best calibre screening staff rapidly get frustrated and move on.
That's the way it used to be done, until a couple of twits flew a couple of aircraft into a couple of buildings. These days there is too much scrutiny of the screening points by DOTARS and the media to get away with that sort of common sense. As various posters have pointed out, the current madness is not the fault of the screeners. They work under pressure from their company (who wants to keep the contract), the hirer (be it airport owner or airline, depending on the location) and the government (in the form of DOTARS). DOTARS use their staff in plain clothes to pass through the points with a test item to see if it is detected by the guards. If it is not, there are repercussions for that guard and the company. They have used airline staff in uniform before to test the process, there is no reason why they would not use someone in a pilot’s uniform to see how effective the screening is. Hence the lack of discretion.
To add to the frustration, different magnometers have different sensitivities, depending on brand, age and calibration. This is why your RMs will set off some and not others. Again, this is not the fault of the screeners, but the lack of standardization across the country’s airports, which also applies to the local procedures at various screening points and their different levels of tolerance.
In addition, the current labour shortage, low pay rates for security guards and the everlasting joy of being abused by pilots and passengers all day means that the best calibre screening staff rapidly get frustrated and move on.
Very interesting discussion.
Firstly, to the Qantas pilots involved in this nonsense. GOOD ON YA
Enough is enough it's time to let our feelings known!
As professional a pilot, it's insulting to be treated as a potential threat to avaition security every time I go to work. Yet muslim baggage loaders that have access airside can go to work with out any security screening.
Madness
Firstly, to the Qantas pilots involved in this nonsense. GOOD ON YA
Enough is enough it's time to let our feelings known!
As professional a pilot, it's insulting to be treated as a potential threat to avaition security every time I go to work. Yet muslim baggage loaders that have access airside can go to work with out any security screening.
Madness
Last edited by Sid Departure; 4th Jul 2007 at 10:14.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bring on separate screening areas for airside employees ,like a lot of other civilised countrys do.
Bugger I think I may have just called NewZealand civilised,in a backhanded sort of way, bother!
Bugger I think I may have just called NewZealand civilised,in a backhanded sort of way, bother!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats to the Pilot facing disciplinary action.
Screening tech crew is a croc and I've had enough thanks.
"John Borghetti said all employees are subject to the same stringent security screenings as all other travellers"
For sure...
And this, "In the United Kingdom it is alleged that Islamic extremists have recruited doctors, so the possibility exists that a pilot could also be a security risk."
Oh yeah, doctors could be extremists .........so........a pilot could be......so........they have to be screened because.........du-oh.
WTF?
Screening tech crew is a croc and I've had enough thanks.
"John Borghetti said all employees are subject to the same stringent security screenings as all other travellers"
For sure...
And this, "In the United Kingdom it is alleged that Islamic extremists have recruited doctors, so the possibility exists that a pilot could also be a security risk."
Oh yeah, doctors could be extremists .........so........a pilot could be......so........they have to be screened because.........du-oh.
WTF?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have no problem with it as long as EVERYONE is screened. All treated equally. Sure its a pain in the arse... can't see it going away.
Can't stand pax comments when I use the staff line to expedite....
Can't stand pax comments when I use the staff line to expedite....
Unbelievable
From people who should be setting an example.
No wonder people sometimes get the idea pilots are egotistical etc etc.
I will agree with ALL people should be treated the same.
I cannot believe the stuff that is being used as a defence by some people here. If I recall, the people responsible for 9/11 had trained as pilots, had pilot licences, had reasons to be on airfields etc etc. Next thing you know they will be screening doctors, they don't pose a threat either.
un #$%%# believable
From people who should be setting an example.
No wonder people sometimes get the idea pilots are egotistical etc etc.
I will agree with ALL people should be treated the same.
I cannot believe the stuff that is being used as a defence by some people here. If I recall, the people responsible for 9/11 had trained as pilots, had pilot licences, had reasons to be on airfields etc etc. Next thing you know they will be screening doctors, they don't pose a threat either.
un #$%%# believable
ozbiggles.
Few pilots would be complaining if EVERYONE who has airside access was treated the same. Read the earlier posts above if you can.
You might also want to check two of your three recollections about the hijackers of Sept 11. Revisionist history at work here.
Few pilots would be complaining if EVERYONE who has airside access was treated the same. Read the earlier posts above if you can.
You might also want to check two of your three recollections about the hijackers of Sept 11. Revisionist history at work here.
Last edited by compressor stall; 4th Jul 2007 at 12:52.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No offence aimed at engineers Nepotism. Just showing the inconsistency of what gets allowed into the cockpit by one means but not by another!
Ozbiggles, you do indeed need a history lesson. The 911 hijackers did not gain access to the aeroplanes as pilots. They simply learned to fly enough so that they could hit a building. And note what happened once they had control of the cockpit. We ALREADY have control of the cockpit before we even leave the ground. Even a butt-naked airline pilot could do something very nasty with the aeroplane if he has the inclination! And no metal detector or xray machine in the world could stop him.
Crank - it is not the "Asic" by itself that makes airline pilots a pretty safe bet. It is numerous background checks carried out by authorities above and beyond what the Asic requires. These are done for the Company, not Airservices or anyone else. There are these as well as psych profiles and all sorts of other things which joe public DOES NOT get done and the 911 hijackers DID NOT get done and no hijacker gets done. What is required is a behind-the-scenes check that you, the pilot, really are who you say you are, because once they are locked in that cockpit, you are at their mercy no matter what they've had confiscated at a security checkpoint!
Bottom line: the public screening of pilots is for show, and no matter how many umbrellas the security people confiscate, they still let them take control of the cockpit a few minutes later. Notwithstanding this, I agree pilots should not make a "show", regardless of their frustration. But something does need to be done with tailoring security appropriately.
Ozbiggles, you do indeed need a history lesson. The 911 hijackers did not gain access to the aeroplanes as pilots. They simply learned to fly enough so that they could hit a building. And note what happened once they had control of the cockpit. We ALREADY have control of the cockpit before we even leave the ground. Even a butt-naked airline pilot could do something very nasty with the aeroplane if he has the inclination! And no metal detector or xray machine in the world could stop him.
Crank - it is not the "Asic" by itself that makes airline pilots a pretty safe bet. It is numerous background checks carried out by authorities above and beyond what the Asic requires. These are done for the Company, not Airservices or anyone else. There are these as well as psych profiles and all sorts of other things which joe public DOES NOT get done and the 911 hijackers DID NOT get done and no hijacker gets done. What is required is a behind-the-scenes check that you, the pilot, really are who you say you are, because once they are locked in that cockpit, you are at their mercy no matter what they've had confiscated at a security checkpoint!
Bottom line: the public screening of pilots is for show, and no matter how many umbrellas the security people confiscate, they still let them take control of the cockpit a few minutes later. Notwithstanding this, I agree pilots should not make a "show", regardless of their frustration. But something does need to be done with tailoring security appropriately.
Last edited by DutchRoll; 4th Jul 2007 at 13:20.
CS and DR
hmmm, did I say they gained access to the cockpit because they were pilots. NO. The point was they had a pilots licence, apparently according to some, Pilots should be above getting checked/stopped.
hmmmm, did I say everybody should be treated the same. YES I did, that is if you can read my post.
Let me see if I can get my point across to you again. Listening ears on.
Everybody should be subjected to the same screening process, if its tougher than it should be GOOD!Would you rather it was soft?
hmmm, did I say they gained access to the cockpit because they were pilots. NO. The point was they had a pilots licence, apparently according to some, Pilots should be above getting checked/stopped.
hmmmm, did I say everybody should be treated the same. YES I did, that is if you can read my post.
Let me see if I can get my point across to you again. Listening ears on.
Everybody should be subjected to the same screening process, if its tougher than it should be GOOD!Would you rather it was soft?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The bottom of a scotch bottle
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on, If I was going to bring down my aircraft I'd use a 110g tube of toothpaste, a wristwatch, and an ingenoius device cleverly secreted away in my shoes.
Pushing the control column has never ocured to me
Pushing the control column has never ocured to me
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everybody should be subjected to the same screening process, if its tougher than it should be GOOD
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everybody should be subjected to the same screening process, if its tougher than it should be GOOD!Would you rather it was soft?
Talk about a non-sequitur!
That "tougher is better" does not follow, and runs the risk of losing sight of the ultimate aim, thus diverting attention from the clever ways terrorists do things. Like I said, the important thing is not what the pilot takes into the cockpit with him (within reason of course - I guess we'd have to draw the line somewhere before the submachinegun and 6 sticks of TNT), but that he is exactly who he says he is, and that he has been thoroughly checked out - as many times as you like - by intelligence/security services and psych profiling.
Nunc est bibendum
ozbiggles wins the award for the dopiest post tonight! 
In no particular order.....Bob Hawke 'trained as a pilot' too but that doesn't make him one. In the context of this discussion the fact that the Sep 11 hijackers 'trained as pilots' is as relevant as my wife training in child care when it comes to the death of a child at a childcare facility somewhere else in Australia. Precisely zero.
I'm sure that any self respecting terrorist could probably get an ASIC and probably get a uniform of some description so I don't think any of us are getting out of shape with the general philosophy behind screening. I think the point of most thinking pilots has always been about two things.
1. The inconsistency of the policy as it applies to those that have access to the aircraft...as others have pointed out John Borghetti's statement about all staff enduring screening is a gross distortion of the reality.
2. The manner in which the screening is carried out is often inappropriate with little recourse available to the individual crew member.
Wash context: I've walked a mile in their shoes. I was a security screener some years ago- pre Sept 11. I know the job and I know the challenges. It's a crappy, mind numbing, thankless job. Sometimes the crew are great, sometimes they're dills. At the end of the day though screening is just aspect of aviation security and the sooner we acknowledge this publicly and do something serious instead of this b/s PR exercise that we currently call 'aviation security' the better off we'll all be!
In no particular order.....Bob Hawke 'trained as a pilot' too but that doesn't make him one. In the context of this discussion the fact that the Sep 11 hijackers 'trained as pilots' is as relevant as my wife training in child care when it comes to the death of a child at a childcare facility somewhere else in Australia. Precisely zero.
I'm sure that any self respecting terrorist could probably get an ASIC and probably get a uniform of some description so I don't think any of us are getting out of shape with the general philosophy behind screening. I think the point of most thinking pilots has always been about two things.
1. The inconsistency of the policy as it applies to those that have access to the aircraft...as others have pointed out John Borghetti's statement about all staff enduring screening is a gross distortion of the reality.
2. The manner in which the screening is carried out is often inappropriate with little recourse available to the individual crew member.
Wash context: I've walked a mile in their shoes. I was a security screener some years ago- pre Sept 11. I know the job and I know the challenges. It's a crappy, mind numbing, thankless job. Sometimes the crew are great, sometimes they're dills. At the end of the day though screening is just aspect of aviation security and the sooner we acknowledge this publicly and do something serious instead of this b/s PR exercise that we currently call 'aviation security' the better off we'll all be!