Heathrow security
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: LHR
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FormerFlyer
If I got some spare time will register for the IRIS immigration thingy on the way out, hopefully to speed my re-entry - anyone else done it yet?
It works quite well - especially on those annoying days when you land at T4 and find a huge queue. Looking into the camera is fiddly and is not quite as quick as the Privium service at Schiphol (or the sadly now defunct InsPass service in JFK), but it does work and is clearly a valuable initiative.
I don't know whether when the machine is broken you are sent to the head of the queue (as in Schiphol) - haven't had to test that yet.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: somewhere near LTN
Age: 50
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting info there thanks - hopefully will have enough time tomorrow morning before having to be bussed to some stand in the middle of nowhere 
Is it easy enough to find the pod thingy on return to LHR? I think they should combine it with some laser eye surgery at the same time- could help pay for itself quickly
cheers
FF
Is it easy enough to find the pod thingy on return to LHR? I think they should combine it with some laser eye surgery at the same time- could help pay for itself quickly
cheers
FF
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Formerflyer - for your info, Immigration select who they want, rather than you automatically getting to use the new scheme. If you do not fulfil certain criteria, they will not enrol you straight away.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
The Terminal 2 IRIS enrolment office is open until 2100. It's easy to get to from T1 as well if you happen to be there, because you can just walk through the airside corridor that leads from the FCC to T2 departures, and back again.
Enrolment only takes about 5 minutes - at least for a British citizen. If you are one, I don't think that there are any further criteria to be met - just turn up and sign up.
The IRIS machine at T1 worked well for me when I returned to LHR from the trip on which I'd registered. It didn't matter very much as it was an 0500 arrival, but I'd made the effort so I was definitely going to use it.
Coincidentally, when I'd arrived in HKG, it was the first time I'd ever seen their ID card thumbprint-reading machines, so I was automatically admitted there as well. Between these machines and the self-service check-in machines, I'll soon only be seeing humans at the security checkpoints.
Enrolment only takes about 5 minutes - at least for a British citizen. If you are one, I don't think that there are any further criteria to be met - just turn up and sign up.
The IRIS machine at T1 worked well for me when I returned to LHR from the trip on which I'd registered. It didn't matter very much as it was an 0500 arrival, but I'd made the effort so I was definitely going to use it.
Coincidentally, when I'd arrived in HKG, it was the first time I'd ever seen their ID card thumbprint-reading machines, so I was automatically admitted there as well. Between these machines and the self-service check-in machines, I'll soon only be seeing humans at the security checkpoints.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding men wanding men and women wanding women at security. Firstly I hope a good hands on search is carried out first as the search is not only to find metal items but non metalic weapons hence male passengers can't be waved through when the male guard is frisking, also a percentage of random searches have to be done on top of activations and its not for some else to choose.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
Originally Posted by radeng
Hmmm? Are you sure they are?
When one of them saw me, one said "Passenger!" and they all sprang into action to screen my bags. It reminded me of this Far Side cartoon:-
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Essex(innit) U.K.
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dropped my other half at T4 this morning at 5ish, I did wonder what the super-tent was all about but presumed there was just another strike on somewhere.
I have to say that as an infrequent flyer I was quite shocked at what a total cack hole the place was, as Britain's flagship airport and the national carrier's shop front the place was a total disgrace.
The toilets were full and overflowing, some staff gave misleading information and were generally unhelpful (some were the opposite but were in a minority) and the place just felt run down and shabby, not to mention the fact that the place was full of people which is never a good thing at that time of the morning.
Glad it wasn't me flying today.
I have to say that as an infrequent flyer I was quite shocked at what a total cack hole the place was, as Britain's flagship airport and the national carrier's shop front the place was a total disgrace.
The toilets were full and overflowing, some staff gave misleading information and were generally unhelpful (some were the opposite but were in a minority) and the place just felt run down and shabby, not to mention the fact that the place was full of people which is never a good thing at that time of the morning.
Glad it wasn't me flying today.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: on the edge
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by manintheback
And finally Bloody Awful Airports have a message on their website claiming
a) too many people departing early on holiday for Easter (odd that I was caught in February in all this, now that really was an early Easter.)
a) too many people departing early on holiday for Easter (odd that I was caught in February in all this, now that really was an early Easter.)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Age: 64
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certain posts excepted, I am afraid I still don't understand the British public's acceptance of poor standards. Allow me to provide an example of what it should be:
On Friday, I flew out of my "home" airport of Don Muang (Bangkok), intending to head for gate 44. Instead, I can only assume somewhat hung over from the night before, I went through security for gate 74 (easily done, as they are roughly opposite each other
). With apologies and a sheepish grin, I then turned round and went through the correct security screen before joining the flight. My point is, that going through BOTH these security screens, including a wallet and body check TWICE, as well as stopping to identify a suspicious fountain pen, took only 5 minutes.
Now, in Heathrow, by contrast...
On Friday, I flew out of my "home" airport of Don Muang (Bangkok), intending to head for gate 44. Instead, I can only assume somewhat hung over from the night before, I went through security for gate 74 (easily done, as they are roughly opposite each other
). With apologies and a sheepish grin, I then turned round and went through the correct security screen before joining the flight. My point is, that going through BOTH these security screens, including a wallet and body check TWICE, as well as stopping to identify a suspicious fountain pen, took only 5 minutes. Now, in Heathrow, by contrast...
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: somewhere near LTN
Age: 50
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dead easy registering
Originally Posted by Mike Jenvey
FormerFlyrer, best of luck with the IRIS programme - been trying to get checked for over a year, never open or available (often didn't have the time after queuing in Security screening!) when I gone through LHR T4:
Will be inbound to LHR from DOH tomorrow morning, so that will be the real test - if I@'m awake enough to find the bleedin' machine
cheers
FF
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Security
This goes some way to explain the DFT and the NASP and ultimately the long queues at airport security check-points. Taken from the DFT website.
Co-operation between Government and the transport industry
Strong relationships have been established with industry, designed to initiate discussions on threat, intelligence, costs and regulation. The emphasis remains on TRANSEC's front-line activities and working in partnership with industry to raise standards as the Government and police alone cannot provide the security regime that is needed.
TRANSEC works closely with all stakeholders to keep under review existing protective security regimes which are designed to achieve proportionality and cost-effectiveness while taking into account the nature of the threat.
Aviation sector
There is a natural, healthy and inevitable tension in the relationship between TRANSEC as the regulator and the industries regulated, given TRANSEC's purpose and the understandable desire of industry to reduce its exposure to security costs. Consultation arrangements with the aviation industry, both through the formal structure of the Department's National Aviation Security Committee (NASC) and its sub-committees, and through regular day-to-day contact at working level are very well established. TRANSEC believes that these arrangements generally work well and that a constructive relationship with the industry exists. TRANSEC is nonetheless always open to suggestions from stakeholders as to how these arrangements may be further enhanced.
The UK's National Aviation Security Programme (NASP) has been in place for many years and much of it is now mandated in EC law. In recent years changes to the NASP have focused on adjusting existing measures rather than developing totally new requirements. Consequently, these adjustments have not been subject to formal Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) procedures, although consultation is undertaken in every case, including consideration of cost as well as practicability and sustainability. TRANSEC has recently reviewed this process and has decided to implement a more formal approach to considering the potential impact of new requirements, based on the formal RIA process. TRANSEC and transport security operate in line with the general principles of good regulation.
The Department does not accept the suggestion made by British Airways in their evidence to the Committee that there is over-regulation in the UK compared with other countries. The Airline has suggested this in general terms to TRANSEC but has not set out in detail the measures it regards as excessive. British Airways states that "in the UK there are more than 50 additional measures required by the Department for Transport and the Government to be implemented by UK airlines alone, over and above those stipulated by EU regulation". This demands some clarification. EU regulation provides a minimum baseline standard, and Member States are permitted to apply more stringent measures. Aviation interests in the UK face a higher level of threat than those in most other Member States and TRANSEC therefore requires, in some areas of its regulation, security measures over and above the EU minimum.
Aviation security in this country is non professional people doing a professional job with a non professional wage. Need I say more.
Co-operation between Government and the transport industry
Strong relationships have been established with industry, designed to initiate discussions on threat, intelligence, costs and regulation. The emphasis remains on TRANSEC's front-line activities and working in partnership with industry to raise standards as the Government and police alone cannot provide the security regime that is needed.
TRANSEC works closely with all stakeholders to keep under review existing protective security regimes which are designed to achieve proportionality and cost-effectiveness while taking into account the nature of the threat.
Aviation sector
There is a natural, healthy and inevitable tension in the relationship between TRANSEC as the regulator and the industries regulated, given TRANSEC's purpose and the understandable desire of industry to reduce its exposure to security costs. Consultation arrangements with the aviation industry, both through the formal structure of the Department's National Aviation Security Committee (NASC) and its sub-committees, and through regular day-to-day contact at working level are very well established. TRANSEC believes that these arrangements generally work well and that a constructive relationship with the industry exists. TRANSEC is nonetheless always open to suggestions from stakeholders as to how these arrangements may be further enhanced.
The UK's National Aviation Security Programme (NASP) has been in place for many years and much of it is now mandated in EC law. In recent years changes to the NASP have focused on adjusting existing measures rather than developing totally new requirements. Consequently, these adjustments have not been subject to formal Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) procedures, although consultation is undertaken in every case, including consideration of cost as well as practicability and sustainability. TRANSEC has recently reviewed this process and has decided to implement a more formal approach to considering the potential impact of new requirements, based on the formal RIA process. TRANSEC and transport security operate in line with the general principles of good regulation.
The Department does not accept the suggestion made by British Airways in their evidence to the Committee that there is over-regulation in the UK compared with other countries. The Airline has suggested this in general terms to TRANSEC but has not set out in detail the measures it regards as excessive. British Airways states that "in the UK there are more than 50 additional measures required by the Department for Transport and the Government to be implemented by UK airlines alone, over and above those stipulated by EU regulation". This demands some clarification. EU regulation provides a minimum baseline standard, and Member States are permitted to apply more stringent measures. Aviation interests in the UK face a higher level of threat than those in most other Member States and TRANSEC therefore requires, in some areas of its regulation, security measures over and above the EU minimum.
Aviation security in this country is non professional people doing a professional job with a non professional wage. Need I say more.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mole Hill
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leodis
Aviation security in this country is non professional people doing a professional job with a non professional wage. Need I say more.
So you say 'pay peanuts and you get monkeys'?? Some of us take pride in our work and have to work under the mis-management of people who really do not have the first idea of security with common sense. I havent been in the job long but somedays i feel like 'why do i bother'. Hassle from Terminal Officers, Supervisors and Passengers alike with no thanks from anyone for a poxy wage, when i could be stacking shelves at Asda for more money and less responsibility.
I love the job and i love the people i work with and thats what makes it worth while for me. Anything else and i have started letting it go over my head, because thats the only way to deal with it.
I am always polite and have a smile on my face, i go out of my way to make the whole security thing not seem horrendous to the passengers because they have paid for their hols/business trip and its not their fault that management and staffing is sometimes as c~~~ as it is. We have to make do and thats the problem, we shouldnt have to make do and quite frankly neither should the passengers.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tea green International
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DOT rules to be enforced
in regard to carry on bags....this should reduce the security delays, assuming that you have removed your shoes, belt, lap top and make up from your bag, and taken off your outer garment.
Just as an aside why do Luton insist that you do NOT put your coat in the tray, and every other airport I have been to recently insists you dont.
Will Luton pay for all the damage to buttons, belt etc, that get tangled in the rollers....
Bumz
Just as an aside why do Luton insist that you do NOT put your coat in the tray, and every other airport I have been to recently insists you dont.
Will Luton pay for all the damage to buttons, belt etc, that get tangled in the rollers....
Bumz
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot the difference
BAA Website
"Too many people departing early on holiday for Easter"
BAA Report from BBC Website
"UK airports group BAA has reported a 1.4% dip in March's passenger numbers compared with a year ago.....BAA, which owns seven UK airports, said that the late timing of Easter this year had also contributed to the fall."
ooops
BAA Website
"Too many people departing early on holiday for Easter"
BAA Report from BBC Website
"UK airports group BAA has reported a 1.4% dip in March's passenger numbers compared with a year ago.....BAA, which owns seven UK airports, said that the late timing of Easter this year had also contributed to the fall."
ooops
Thread Starter
And the fall isn't reaction from people getting so pi**ed off in the queues for security that next time, they go elsewhere?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by manintheback
Spot the difference
BAA Website
"Too many people departing early on holiday for Easter"
BAA Report from BBC Website
"UK airports group BAA has reported a 1.4% dip in March's passenger numbers compared with a year ago.....BAA, which owns seven UK airports, said that the late timing of Easter this year had also contributed to the fall."
ooops
BAA Website
"Too many people departing early on holiday for Easter"
BAA Report from BBC Website
"UK airports group BAA has reported a 1.4% dip in March's passenger numbers compared with a year ago.....BAA, which owns seven UK airports, said that the late timing of Easter this year had also contributed to the fall."
ooops
Thread Starter
gdiphil,
>I am hoping my LHR T4 experience on Thursday will be civilised as a consequence!<
'Civilised' and 'LHR T4' are arguably mutually contradictory at the best of times. However, the best of luck.
>I am hoping my LHR T4 experience on Thursday will be civilised as a consequence!<
'Civilised' and 'LHR T4' are arguably mutually contradictory at the best of times. However, the best of luck.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's a question of cost over service.....
The whole problem has arisen from HAL trying to reduce the cost of providing security.
Parallel to the DTR requesting that HAL enhance screening to comply with the minimum requirements for screening, they also announced that they were combining the posts of the security management, and the "customer service" (front of house trolleys etc) function. This has in effect halved the progression for employees within the organisation and has caused, let's say "an atmosphere" amongst the workforce.
In meetings with HAL, they have put the blame on passenger's huge amount of hand luggage causing the problems. Also the airline community have passed forward a number of suggestions to improve the service, but not one penny has been spent since the problem arose over six weeks ago.
We get regular briefings now on how they are managing the situation, but when all is said and done, more has been said than done!
I have a few views on this....
I travel through Dublin frequently, where I have to take off my shoes, belt etc etc, and have nowhere near the amount of queuing than in LHRT2 for example.
Also, hand luggage? The screening takes place before the shopping, yet compared to most European airports where this takes place either after the airside/tax free shopping areas or, at boarding gates, considering that pax may have even more opportunity to increase their handluggage, there are not the same problems, or anywhere near.
The laptop business?... well if you are queuing for an hour you have probably prepared for the removal of laptop, etc 5 times by the time you reach the machines out of sheer boredom, and the want of something to do.
How HAL want to tackle the problem? well as cheaply as possible. Instead of investing in such infrastructure such as more staff, extra machines, better facilities, they want the airlines to enforce hand luggage restrictions. Hardly good for our product is it?
No longer can our business class pax turn up early in the hope of relaxing in the exec lounge and catch up on the odd email, by the time they have queued, they might as well go straight to the gate.
It is just another example of HAL's shortfalls on Airport Management.
Blame, excuses, PR (took weeks for BBC / press to acknowledge the problem and report on it, but that was inline with HAL's press release about Hand Luggage restrictions) is what is managed rather than dealing with the problem itself.
I for one will not be restricting my passenger's already limited hand luggage allowance further until I see HAL close the landside shopping outlets, (likely?? )ensuring they are serious properly managing this crisis.
rant rant rage rage etc....
Parallel to the DTR requesting that HAL enhance screening to comply with the minimum requirements for screening, they also announced that they were combining the posts of the security management, and the "customer service" (front of house trolleys etc) function. This has in effect halved the progression for employees within the organisation and has caused, let's say "an atmosphere" amongst the workforce.
In meetings with HAL, they have put the blame on passenger's huge amount of hand luggage causing the problems. Also the airline community have passed forward a number of suggestions to improve the service, but not one penny has been spent since the problem arose over six weeks ago.
We get regular briefings now on how they are managing the situation, but when all is said and done, more has been said than done!
I have a few views on this....
I travel through Dublin frequently, where I have to take off my shoes, belt etc etc, and have nowhere near the amount of queuing than in LHRT2 for example.
Also, hand luggage? The screening takes place before the shopping, yet compared to most European airports where this takes place either after the airside/tax free shopping areas or, at boarding gates, considering that pax may have even more opportunity to increase their handluggage, there are not the same problems, or anywhere near.
The laptop business?... well if you are queuing for an hour you have probably prepared for the removal of laptop, etc 5 times by the time you reach the machines out of sheer boredom, and the want of something to do.
How HAL want to tackle the problem? well as cheaply as possible. Instead of investing in such infrastructure such as more staff, extra machines, better facilities, they want the airlines to enforce hand luggage restrictions. Hardly good for our product is it?
No longer can our business class pax turn up early in the hope of relaxing in the exec lounge and catch up on the odd email, by the time they have queued, they might as well go straight to the gate.
It is just another example of HAL's shortfalls on Airport Management.
Blame, excuses, PR (took weeks for BBC / press to acknowledge the problem and report on it, but that was inline with HAL's press release about Hand Luggage restrictions) is what is managed rather than dealing with the problem itself.
I for one will not be restricting my passenger's already limited hand luggage allowance further until I see HAL close the landside shopping outlets, (likely?? )ensuring they are serious properly managing this crisis.
rant rant rage rage etc....
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: london
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people on this thread clearly have major neuroses with other passengers hand baggage. If I board last, and there is no more overhead space, then that is just tough.
If I pay for a business ticket which cost more and gives me more luggage allowance, I see no reason not to use it. As regards this whole debate, the bottom line is that BAA want to use any trick to maximise profits, including tight restrictions on hand luggage, and blaming the paying passengers for any delays (due to understaffing). Never forget, that EVERY time you go through security at an airport, you are paying to do so. It is not a free service.
I cannot think of many other service industries where such poor service is offered, with no recourse for a refund, or alternative supplier. It truly is a gravy train for BAA, there is no alternative, and passengers seem happy to accept that all of it is their own fault for being slow or stupid. So tell me why BAA should give a flying f***? They are maximising their profits, that's all, and the media/public seem to believe any old guff they issue in press releases.
Soon a new rule will be introduced: you cannot take any hand luggage at all through security (in order to speed things up, of course), but you are allowed to purchase up to 7Kg in weight of duty free goods (at high street prices or more!) from BAA concessions. A nice little earner!
If I pay for a business ticket which cost more and gives me more luggage allowance, I see no reason not to use it. As regards this whole debate, the bottom line is that BAA want to use any trick to maximise profits, including tight restrictions on hand luggage, and blaming the paying passengers for any delays (due to understaffing). Never forget, that EVERY time you go through security at an airport, you are paying to do so. It is not a free service.
I cannot think of many other service industries where such poor service is offered, with no recourse for a refund, or alternative supplier. It truly is a gravy train for BAA, there is no alternative, and passengers seem happy to accept that all of it is their own fault for being slow or stupid. So tell me why BAA should give a flying f***? They are maximising their profits, that's all, and the media/public seem to believe any old guff they issue in press releases.
Soon a new rule will be introduced: you cannot take any hand luggage at all through security (in order to speed things up, of course), but you are allowed to purchase up to 7Kg in weight of duty free goods (at high street prices or more!) from BAA concessions. A nice little earner!