VIRGIN Blue pilot tests positive for traces of explosives

[fmcinop]

However,to say a pilot is incapable of an act of terror or would rather just use the controls to achieve that goal is simplistic at best and dangerously naive at worst...

I asked a security person once what they were looking for when screening me.

Anything that would enable you to gain access to the flight deck

was the reply as I stand there in full uniform! I don't think it naive at all to point out the fact that out of all the people who work on, or near and aircraft, we are the only ones who do not need to smuggle contraban onboard in order to do naughty thing with that aircraft.

[On Guard]

BNE is worst - always tested going through transit, the guards comment its stupid but they ordered to do it on at least 1 in the group.

I find it completely ridiculous, pilots are perhaps the only one role that should not be subject to screening. Hosties maybe but as many of you alluded to if I wanted to blow up a plane it would be a lot easier to pole it in than try and 1. Make a bomb, 2. Smuggle it past security, passengers, work colleagues, engineers etc etc to hide this bomb.

Absolutely no logic at all to this bulls***.

Pilots are screened though their career development from the first day of medical and onwards with ASIC's, interviews etc etc.

[Tester Call 121.5]

Personally ,I would rather hand them my ASIC card, they have a good look at it and then look at me and say, "Check, on your way."
Ahh, that will be the day.

[Mr. Hat]

evyjet, the problem is the people that make these rules really have no idea what goes on at the front. And these piloting armchair experts are even worse with their tiny bit of knowledge on the topic.

The best thing is to just go along with it play the game. And if i tested for explosives or whatever i'd just go along with their process as its not worth the trouble (you might get tazed!). Like that everyone (joe public armchairidiot) can feel all safe warm and fuzzy.

I must say though that i find most people are quite polite and haven't had a problem. Its just the system thats stupid.

[lowerlobe]

It appears as though from these posts that there really are some precious and fragile ego's on the flight deck...and for a group of people who are supposed to be able to look outside the square that would not be the case with several people posting here...

fmcinop....You and some others are making several assumptions which is not always a good idea with flying or aviation in general.

Who is to say that a pilot is thinking and acting rationally?

Who is to say that it is not their aircraft but another aircraft that they intend to put in harms way by using an explosive device?

Who is to say that they don't want to take the risk that the other pilot might be able to stop them if it is their aircraft?

I agree that all people who have access to aircraft be subjected to security but there is no reason to prevent pilots from that same scrutiny....

[DJ738]

BNE is the worst. And consistency is what is required.

As crew, one day we'll pass through security / screening unquestioned, no search of hand baggage etc whatsoever.

But the next day, everything will be stripped out of our hand baggage, we'll be told to remove our jackets, and our shoes...

And the next day, again, we'll pass through completely unquestioned...

THIS huge inconsistency is what causes airline crew's annoyance at the arrogant, and just generally rude "security" staff.

[fmcinop]

lowerlobe, which

several assumptions is not always a good idea with flying or aviation in general

please enlighten us all!

[Qanchor]

lowerlobe said,
"I agree that all people who have access to aircraft be subjected to security but there is no reason to prevent pilots from that same scrutiny...."

You're kind of right lowerlobe, but the fact is this ain't the case. Every day numerous (ground) staff cross from groundside to airside several times by simply swiping a card. No ASIC check, no x-ray, no patdown, nothing. So until a truely professional/consistent/reliable & equitable system is in place, that covers all staff, (not just what the punters see), they will continue to attract responses like these.
And another thing...
Let me get this right. Someone tested positive for nasty stuff and he walked away, then they, (our ever-professional security staff), tried to cover-up their stuff-up? OH, well done those men!!
I used to think these people were otherwise unemployable, now........

[Stubby]

Get over yourselves, annoying? yes, is it going to go away? no, its 30 seconds out of your life move on - next topic please

[Metro man]

Ground all aircraft, end of problem. No more fuel tankers allowed on the road incase of hijacking, no more producing fertiliser or diesel (bomb fuel). Have everyone watched by a permanent security guard, and have another guard watch the first one just in case.

Should solve the problem.

[Flying Binghi]

its 30 seconds out of your life move on

...slowly boiled, like a frog eh 30 seconds here, 5 minutes there, becomes half your life putting up with nonsense.

If the pax jet jocky can pass all the pre job, and in job, check hurdles to get to the front seat - methinks we dont need to check-em pre flight as others have pointed out - they do have their hands on the controls...hmmm, stick forward for ground contact.............

[lowerlobe]

fmcinop....

I thought that was obvious from my post or do you need a braille card?

Qanchor...

That was my point and if people are not being screened and have access then bring this to the attention of the media.

[tipsy2]

Forgive me if this is a thread drift, that's not the intention.

So, Captain Fizgig of Plummet airlines tests positive to traces of explosive.

So what !

Does it have any negative effect on his/her ability to lead and be part of a airliner crew?

On what grounds would anybody have to prevent him/her going about his lawfull business?

I would expect an excited search of his/her baggage and person and then what if nothing else is found.

Can he/she be detained and for what?

Is testing positive to traces of explosive now illegal?

Probably the safest thing to do is NOT sprinkle lawn food on the front lawn whilst wearing your uniform just before heading off to "work"

Security=Job creation

tipsyfurball

[ITCZ]

Originally Posted by lowerlobe

That was my point and if people are not being screened and have access then bring this to the attention of the media.

Bingo. Give that man a beer.

"The issue aint pussy. The issue is monkey."

What lowerlobe is sayin' here is....

The problem is not the screening. Get over it. Screening is here to stay. If you don't like it, get a job outside RPT. . Just make sure you are paid for your time at work, and your company makes allowance for the extra time and inconvenience of screening. Eg. 45 minute signon prior to ETD? Get real. That is so last-century!

The problem here is perception, not reality. Not too many Joe Publics actually know any professional pilots, and deserved or not, we score continually at or near the top of Most Trusted Professions. Why? They built these opinions on images from popular culture. Not from actually knowing airline pilots.

That is why stories like this....
Flying in the face of the law - pilot bikers land fines
.... make front page news, whilst the unemployed bogan that just flew down my street doesnt rate a mention.

The job. A pilot. The public image. Rulebreakers? Careless? Fails an explosives test yet flies an aeroplane that my family might be on? Does not match.

Loss of esteem in the public eye. No sympathy. We pax have to put up with those rules, why are pilots ignoring them? And hey, no idea of how long it takes to be a jet pilot? Who cares, but we better stop them leftist fascist Taoist fundamentalist terrorists going to flight school and getting pilot jobs! More screening, bring it on!!!

Its a media swipe at pilots. It is the politics of envy. And it is going unanswered. Throw mud, it sticks. Especially if no-one hoses it off.

The newpaper probably did not give a thought to contacting AIPA or the AFAP for their take on the situation. Probably don't know those organisations exist.

We wont fix intrusive, distracting, disrespectful screening by walking away from or snarling at the $10/hr Chubb and Group 4 flunkies manning the checkpoint.

Intrusive security screening, to the point where it arcs up pilots and disturbs their focus on their safety critical task, has been placed in the media as a problem in the UK.

BALPA SAYS: "Walk A Mile Through Security In Our Shoes"

That is the way to fix it. Ok, security is here to stay. Just don't distract me from my safety critical role. Don't see me as part of the problem. Recognise that I am the person you need to support. Make the rules clear, reasonable, and consistently applied. Make the screening efficient and let me get to my aeroplane.

Who is going to do the BALPA thing here?

Anyone?

[Sunfish]

If I had to face security screening three or four times a day, every day, I think I would explode, no explosives needed.

I had to go through in a hurry at Melbourne last week to meet a Son that had a life threatening infection to get him straight to Hospital.

I had to bite my tongue as the little Indian/Pakistani/ Sri Lankan security clown tried to explain to Three Chinese ladies in front of me about removing metalwork, then my belt buckle set everything off, so it was back and forth about Four effing times.

As for "explosive residue" what an effing stupidity! I have an Army surplus bag that I use occasionally. It has traces of "explosive residue" on it because it was effing well used to carry effing explosives! Personally, I, and all of my clothes, will reek of effing "explosive residue" if, the day before a flight, I've spent the morning at the rifle range, as I sometimes do.

And to what purpose? Bruce Schneir the American Security expert, has just condemned this whole pile of crap as pointless "Security theatre".

The Things He Carried - The Atlantic (November 2008)

Furthermore, there are other, major, gapingly wide holes in Airport security that go totally and completely unplugged that I will not detail here..

[RENURPP]

Socket and co,

I disagree, whilst I don't complain if and when I am tested I believe the whole security system is an absolute joke.
If all people did as you suggested and simply did everything some bumbling little bureaucrat dreams up what a miserable and ineffective little world we would live in. Most of these people actually come from a different planet. I think they may watch too much TV.
There are so many problems with this crazy security system, it is designed as a PR exercise and nothing more.
If I ever become a bureaucrat I may come up with a requirement that all pilots who submit freely to trace detection, are required to take a anal examination by ‘Bubba”. It would make just as much sense.

Who is better placed to adversely effect the safety of an aircraft if they choose to.

Exactly, so why would they actually need a weapon? Do you think they need to risk carrying an explosive devise to effect safety?
How about all the unscreened people who already have access to the aircraft including but not limited to engineers? Caterers? refuelers, ground crew baggage handlers and toilet cleaners and emptyers, safety officers, Air traffic controllers, passenger handling ground staff, how about those dopy federal police they even carry guns straight through security no problems. Mate even while an aircraft is in a hangar undergoing heavy mainaenance some one who really wants to do damage can organise it. Do you know anyone who has become a federal cop? Its not that hard, they are not chosen on their IQ. If they can run 100mts the day they are interviewed they are in.
Your worried about the guy up front with control of the whole machine. Get real.
Whilst there should be a serious need to ensure the Pilots backgrounds are thoroughly checked and the people boarding are in fact identified as the correct people once on the flight deck an explosive device is a little bit of an over kill.
The Cabin crew should be checked, they do a two week course, they come and go they have access to the flight deck and would normally require a weapon to gain control of an aircraft, the Pilots already have it.

[Buster Hyman]

2 separate issues here as I see it.

1. Should aircrew be screened? (Done to death here & elsewhere)

2. A person tested positive to a screening criteria, didn't stick around & was allowed to continue.

I think the real issue for this thread is that a person, who happened to be crew, didn't wait for test results (are they supposed to?) and that the security staff did not act upon this fact. As a professional, and in the interests of teamwork, I think he should have stuck around and, as professionals & in the interests of security, I think the security staff should have acted properly and alerted the authorities of a breach.

On a side note and whilst this screening continues, I personally think aircrew should take the high ground & act as professionals when screened. Maintain the high ground & then the nasty little nazi's that levitate to these types of roles can be found out and seen for what they are worth. I also agree with Tester Call who suggested that the ASIC should be sufficient when passing through a screening area. Having been subjected to the same scrutiny when passing through INTL security, but also having had the option to say "Sod it, I'll go through the canteen or Customs downstairs", it beggars belief that all the other authorities at the airport are quite happy for me to go that way with my ASIC.

[lowerlobe]

I don't think anyone here disagrees that some people can gain access to an aircraft without a security check and that is wrong plain and simple....

However, to suggest that pilots should not have to endure that because they are pilots is just as wrong...

RENURPP & Co..Read my previous post and tell me where I was wrong in that circumstances change as do people..and RENURPP,your demeaning description of other occupations tells me more about you than your general argument.

Are your ego's really that fragile that you can't see the bigger picture.Not everything we do is complete and failsafe..

That is why you guys have sim sessions..to try and think of situations that may happen and practice to control them and not the other way around.

But....every now and again a situation comes up in real life that was not thought of and has not been programmed into a sim session.

However,using RENURPP's logic we should get rid of all sim sessions because they are not fool proof and cannot be guaranteed to prevent all situations from happening...they are obviously a waste of time and should be denigrated and ignored...

[Socket]

RENURPP, I see, so because some precious pilots believe that gold braid makes them better than everyone else we should allow them to bypass the security check, because they can just push the control column forward.

Wake up dopey, not all terrorists and other associated nutbags are suicidal. I would hazard a guess that the vast majority would love a free pass onto an aircraft so they could leave their device to detonate long after they had departed.

The fact that other people have access without being checked is of course wrong and is an example of how flawed the system is. That only means the holes in the system need fixing, not that more holes should be introduced to satisfy some holier than thou pilots.

Here's a tip, you assume pilots are trusted and respected by the wider community, that has been earned by the professionalism of generations of pilots that have gone before you. It wont take too many episodes of a pilot throwing a tantrum at security or just plain deliberately and obviously trying to circumvent it for that respect and trust to turn to something else entirely.

No one likes an up themselves smartass.

[fmcinop]

The issue here is not should flight crew be screened, it is that most other people associated with the operation of aircraft are not. If you are going to screen one group you need to screen the lot and that means the cleaners, catering, the aircraft washers, engineers and the safety officers, cutter 1, and the guy to dumps the loo...and the list goes on.

As for us (pilots), do like they do in Adelaide and provide a dedicated screening point for crew and ground staff only...just outside our crew room away from the public screening point. Everyone including ground staff and engineers who go airside are screened there and that is how it should be.

I read a few weeks ago about the USA trailing a more stream lined proceedure for flight crew only which enables them to proceed through security in a matter of seconds.