The metal knives are already on board so how does screening them out in the terminal help?

Correct.

Bummer if you needed to take p!ss on the way out!

So you would prefer a guy takes his 10" Bowie on board, rather than utilize some blunt cutlery from Business?

Security (and policing) is a mind numbingly boring job for 99.99% of the time

So when something happens everyone gets excited and piles in - you can see that when 4 police cars turn up to arrest a drunk in your local shopping mall

Obviously very few have actually read what happened. The plane arrived in Melbourne in an 'unscreened' state. The passengers were told they would be escorted out of the terminal under guard as the whole terminal would have to be re-screened should they mingle with screened passengers. Only passengers that were boarding subsequent flights or wished to be in the terminal longer were required to rescreen.

The main question here is how a whole Dash-8 load of passengers was allowed to disembark into the Sydney terminal secure side without being screened. The QF statement makes it sound like one member of the public was let through, the statement from a passenger suggest the whole plane (inbound Orange flight) was not screened and only a passenger alerted authorities that a security breech had occured. The passengers version does make sense as Orange does not have screening procedures, so assuming it was a Dash-8-300 at worst it could be up to 50 unscreened passengers.

I can see how this could occur with the lack of gates at peak times for the QF terminal in Sydney sometimes leading to long delays. Put one aircraft on the wrong bay and suddenly a surge of unscreened passengers enter the terminal and you are now facing rescreening the entire thing. The other question is now, if it was only a member of the public that found the issue, has this issue occurred before and no one noticed....

This definitely warrants some form of investigation outside of QF. And if somebody is looking for mistakes under pressure leading to safety issues, this might just be the event to prove it. And a good one as nobody was hurt in the process.

Perhaps "very few" have access to the details of what "actually" happened, apart from reports in the mass media. Some initial reports said that all passengers were re-screened, some didn't. More details have come to light since those early reports were published.

The very first post has the link I'm referring to. No one elsr has posted a link to the event in question.

https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-a...0220908-p5bggu

Here's another angle from a journo on the flight. Seems like QF is taking the blame quietly behind the scenes.

Interesting it has to take a jab at the Engineers union for making safety claims during EBA negotiations. Guess they make those claims public when the company stonewalls and it goes behind the scenes when they are happy, as the QF spin group says about this incident, 'nothing sinister here'.

That’s what I heard. A passenger alerted ‘someone’ that none of the passengers had been screened prior to boarding.

It does raise a familiar conundrum. Imagine what would happen if we all pointed out all of the yawning gaps in the security façade. Alas, I doubt it would result in more ‘security’ but I’d bet folding that it would result in even more inconvenience to the law-abiding.