No show pax bag offload regs
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not sure how the screening proccess works for luggage sent down from check-in before it reaches baggage sortation but i'm it does get screened or at least theres an operative watching the x-ray images of all luggage and anything remotley suspicious then gets flagged up and thrown out where it undergoes a screening similar to the unnacompanied luggage.
If they still can't see what the item is then they will call the passenger down so that they take a look in their bag.
There are non common sense issues with security i agree such as Airside Personel may not carry liquids through security even though that person maybe in charge of ensuring the safety af the aircraft or maintaining the aircraft and know that if they wish to do something meliciouse the it's easy enough to do so with a tin of soup/yougart etc or not.
Why should staff have to pay inflated fees for beverages airside because DFT would not allow them to take a drink to work. I wonder if a case would be viable of a staff member taking the DFT to court over having skin cancer after repeated exposure the sun as he is unable to take his sun tan oceon through security. (i know thats a bit daft but there could be other examples too)
If they still can't see what the item is then they will call the passenger down so that they take a look in their bag.
There are non common sense issues with security i agree such as Airside Personel may not carry liquids through security even though that person maybe in charge of ensuring the safety af the aircraft or maintaining the aircraft and know that if they wish to do something meliciouse the it's easy enough to do so with a tin of soup/yougart etc or not.
Why should staff have to pay inflated fees for beverages airside because DFT would not allow them to take a drink to work. I wonder if a case would be viable of a staff member taking the DFT to court over having skin cancer after repeated exposure the sun as he is unable to take his sun tan oceon through security. (i know thats a bit daft but there could be other examples too)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hiding in an office
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In regards to replies regarding issuing a NOTOC for exp baggage, i feel it is better to issue the NOTOC due to the security risk. You know and I know and anyone with an understanding that to get to that point there is a paper trail regarding that bag, but at the same time I feel that not issuing a NOTOC is complacent.
It doesn't take two minutes to issue it and covers your back and gives the skipper something to do!!!
It doesn't take two minutes to issue it and covers your back and gives the skipper something to do!!!
Just to correct a couple of errors that have crept in from my recollection of those dim and distant days 
Following Lockerbie the requirement for a baggage reconciliation check was introduced in the UK - baggage tagged for a flight on which the passenger failed to board was to be offloaded and not carried.
OK .. that was the intent.
This did not require any "screening/x-ray" process to be carried out on that baggage as a matter of course - at the time it was acceptable to forward it onwards either after ageing 24hrs or following the filing of a lost report. The equipment for screening did not exist/was not deployed at that time.
Anyone around the LHR T1/T2/T3 baggage areas in those years will recall the heaps of "ageing" bags that sat around!!
Many airlines in the UK failed to implement any of this at the time and there were years of wrangling which followed with the DFT/DEFTR.
For those of you who like me worked through that period how many of you can recall any widebody a/c offloading ULD's to locate bags.
The safety of bagagge for carriage continued to be based on the presumption that if the passenger travelled (or intended/wished to) then the bag was deemed "safe".
Hold baggage was not being routinely screened at that time - the equipment was not developed/deployed.
Eventually the control authorities did get their act together and started to ensure a process was followed ... this started with trying to strictly enforce the previously patchy "no unacompanied baggage travels unless screened". This is when baggage manifests etc started to appear and actually be used, baggage counts became normal and rush/unaccompanied bag carriage became recorded and x-rayed.
At this point (well before 9/11) the USA did not apply any of these rules. I can recall discussing this at the time with folks from various US carriers & FAA only to be told ... it's not relevent ... no such attacks have been carried out on US a/c within US borders ... it's outside the US that the danger exists and these rules are needed.
Many's the traveller that ended up at regional UK airports having been re-routed ex the States and told their bags would follow the original route and meet them at the final UK destination ... of course they didn't .. the bags reached first point in the UK (typically LHR/LGW) and sat there until PIR taken and followed up.
For a lighter aside I can recall a meeting with various airport/airline folks at a regional UK airport. The meeting was called by a senior UK civil servant who's every other sentance was preceeded by "what the minister requires is ..." .. he even wore a natty spotted bow tie
His best pronouncement of the day came when he told the assembled incredulous humble airline/airport managers present that "the minister requires ....... that each bag is not physically loaded onto an aircraft until the passenger who checked it in has actually boarded the aircraft"
Following the stunned silence it was determined he'd never heard of ULD's or thought that punctuality (in terms of operating with an hour or so of a scheduled time) might be an issue.
I'll stop now ... as my memories flood back it just becomes more frightening......
Following Lockerbie the requirement for a baggage reconciliation check was introduced in the UK - baggage tagged for a flight on which the passenger failed to board was to be offloaded and not carried.
OK .. that was the intent.
This did not require any "screening/x-ray" process to be carried out on that baggage as a matter of course - at the time it was acceptable to forward it onwards either after ageing 24hrs or following the filing of a lost report. The equipment for screening did not exist/was not deployed at that time.
Anyone around the LHR T1/T2/T3 baggage areas in those years will recall the heaps of "ageing" bags that sat around!!
Many airlines in the UK failed to implement any of this at the time and there were years of wrangling which followed with the DFT/DEFTR.
For those of you who like me worked through that period how many of you can recall any widebody a/c offloading ULD's to locate bags.
The safety of bagagge for carriage continued to be based on the presumption that if the passenger travelled (or intended/wished to) then the bag was deemed "safe".
Hold baggage was not being routinely screened at that time - the equipment was not developed/deployed.
Eventually the control authorities did get their act together and started to ensure a process was followed ... this started with trying to strictly enforce the previously patchy "no unacompanied baggage travels unless screened". This is when baggage manifests etc started to appear and actually be used, baggage counts became normal and rush/unaccompanied bag carriage became recorded and x-rayed.
At this point (well before 9/11) the USA did not apply any of these rules. I can recall discussing this at the time with folks from various US carriers & FAA only to be told ... it's not relevent ... no such attacks have been carried out on US a/c within US borders ... it's outside the US that the danger exists and these rules are needed.
Many's the traveller that ended up at regional UK airports having been re-routed ex the States and told their bags would follow the original route and meet them at the final UK destination ... of course they didn't .. the bags reached first point in the UK (typically LHR/LGW) and sat there until PIR taken and followed up.
For a lighter aside I can recall a meeting with various airport/airline folks at a regional UK airport. The meeting was called by a senior UK civil servant who's every other sentance was preceeded by "what the minister requires is ..." .. he even wore a natty spotted bow tie
His best pronouncement of the day came when he told the assembled incredulous humble airline/airport managers present that "the minister requires ....... that each bag is not physically loaded onto an aircraft until the passenger who checked it in has actually boarded the aircraft"
Following the stunned silence it was determined he'd never heard of ULD's or thought that punctuality (in terms of operating with an hour or so of a scheduled time) might be an issue.
I'll stop now ... as my memories flood back it just becomes more frightening......
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: birmingham
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
notoc for exp
there is absolutely no need to issue a notoc for exp - you already have a paper trail with the screening certificate from your relevant security agency to file with the triple a paperwork!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not issuing a NOTOC for experdite baggage is not complacent and is not required as standard practice. All is required is a copy of the unacompanied baggae manifest which has been signed by the security operative to say it has been screened in accordance to rules and regulations of the DFT, it also has to be noted on your "Triple A"
If you think that bag is still a security risk it would be your responsability as an Appointed Person in my eyes to remove it off an aircraft as it should not travel.
If you think that bag is still a security risk it would be your responsability as an Appointed Person in my eyes to remove it off an aircraft as it should not travel.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 34
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new to liverpool
Hi my name is Ian. I was just looking through this forum section as i currently work for Servisair (Easyjet) at Liverpool and noticed some people also work for Servisair at Liverpool here. I have met quite a few operations staff and dispatchers now so some might know me for those who dont, you proberly see me walking around with my mayfly timetable looking confused lol (OJ)
Anyway, the point of this post, to just introduce myself to all those who work at Liverpool and would be great if you could reply to this comment so i could get to know people.
Hope to speak soon
Anyway, the point of this post, to just introduce myself to all those who work at Liverpool and would be great if you could reply to this comment so i could get to know people.
Hope to speak soon
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Over the hill and far away
Age: 76
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
42psi's post reminded me of the time I was flying out of Gibraltar to MAN - some 12 to 18 months after Lockerbie.
As we walked airside, all the pax luggage was lined up on the ramp. We had to walk over to our own luggage, touch it, or them, and then the loaders carried them to the hold.
I wondered at the time whether it was special treatment because of some alert or other. But now, it seems, it may have been just because "the minister requires it".
As we walked airside, all the pax luggage was lined up on the ramp. We had to walk over to our own luggage, touch it, or them, and then the loaders carried them to the hold.
I wondered at the time whether it was special treatment because of some alert or other. But now, it seems, it may have been just because "the minister requires it".
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: YPPH
Age: 38
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just finished learning about Triple A
I can tell you that pre the Lockerbie accident it was the PIC's decision weather a (fail to board) FTB passenger's bags were off loaded, a passenger failed to board the Pan Am 747 to JFK and 10 mins out of LHR the plane blew up.
After the Lockerbie accident the rule was overridden and as of now any passenger that FTB will have their bags removed from the aircraft, no if's buts or maybe's
Tripple A means that the number of bags in the aircraft must match the number of bags checked in, if there is more you have to find it and remove it, if there is less that doesnt matter the plane can still go, if there is a porblem, some one in baggage bay took off to many Bingo stickers, then the bags are off loaded onto the tarmac and every one is called down to identify their bag.
At perth INTL there are 4 levels of checked bag screening (CBS) if a bag fails the 1st screen it is moved onto the 2nd screen point. if a bag passes the 1st screen it is sent to the bag belt for loading onto the aircraft, if a bag does not pass the 4th test it is loaded into a bomb trailer and taken to a remote loacation of the airport to be further investigated.
I can tell you that pre the Lockerbie accident it was the PIC's decision weather a (fail to board) FTB passenger's bags were off loaded, a passenger failed to board the Pan Am 747 to JFK and 10 mins out of LHR the plane blew up.
After the Lockerbie accident the rule was overridden and as of now any passenger that FTB will have their bags removed from the aircraft, no if's buts or maybe's
Tripple A means that the number of bags in the aircraft must match the number of bags checked in, if there is more you have to find it and remove it, if there is less that doesnt matter the plane can still go, if there is a porblem, some one in baggage bay took off to many Bingo stickers, then the bags are off loaded onto the tarmac and every one is called down to identify their bag.
At perth INTL there are 4 levels of checked bag screening (CBS) if a bag fails the 1st screen it is moved onto the 2nd screen point. if a bag passes the 1st screen it is sent to the bag belt for loading onto the aircraft, if a bag does not pass the 4th test it is loaded into a bomb trailer and taken to a remote loacation of the airport to be further investigated.
