A bridge too far

[DespairingTraveller]

This story about potential tagging of airline passengers is in the media today.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/technology/6044310.stm

For what it's worth, I'd just like to say to the aviation community that if this is introduced, I will be stopping flying.

For me, it would be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Last week, in Moscow, already 15 hours into my journey, tired and fed up with delays, I had to remove my shoes, belt and spectacles in order to be frisked by a young lady. As an overweight middle aged male, I did not enjoy feeling extremely vulnerable (because I am so shortsighted that everything around me was a blur), while being acutely aware that the lack of a belt meant that my trousers were in imminent danger of plummeting round my ankles.

I am sick of being ritually humiliated because I want to travel by air. I am not a CRIMINAL, I am a CUSTOMER!

[lexxity]

For what it's worth, I'd just like to say to the aviation community that if this is introduced, I will be stopping flying.

For what it's worth, do you really think the aviation community will have any choice in this matter? If you are sick of being treated like a criminal how do you think airline and airport staff feel having to be treated like this everytime they go airside?

[DespairingTraveller]

Originally Posted by lexxity

For what it's worth, do you really think the aviation community will have any choice in this matter? If you are sick of being treated like a criminal how do you think airline and airport staff feel having to be treated like this everytime they go airside?

I understand how you feel, and I do sympathise - but, in the final analysis, you're being paid to put up with it. While I'm being charged to have it inflicted on me. And I have a rather more easily exercised choice, because I can avoid the indignity without giving up my livelihood.

Also, the term "aviation community" was meant to include not just the airline and airport staff at the front line, but also those who set and influence policy. They need to find a way to a) focus security measures on the real threats, and b) make them less invasive to the customer, or people like me will stop flying.

[Bangkokeasy]

This is a stupid idea that should be smothered at birth. If for no other reason that it would never work, because frequent travellers like me would tell the airport security exactly where they could shove their electronic tag.

[lexxity]

I totally agree that this is a stupid idea.

And I have a rather more easily exercised choice, because I can avoid the indignity without giving up my livelihood.

And there is the problem. I don't want to give up my job, I love my work and it's rare to find a job you are happy in. I could never go back to 9-5.

[Gouabafla]

However, you might like your job a lot less if the Pax were more hassled. I try really hard to be polite and friendly to the staff at airports and on aircraft, but with delays, long periods spent in lines and the tiredness that comes with missing a night's sleep, I can sometimes get a little irritated. I don't think it would take much to push the majority of pax, who try to be nice and friendly, over the edge and turn them into ranting maniacs.

[agent x]

Originally Posted by Gouabafla

but with delays, long periods spent in lines and the tiredness that comes with missing a night's sleep, I can sometimes get a little irritated. I don't think it would take much to push the majority of pax, who try to be nice and friendly, over the edge and turn them into ranting maniacs.

.......the same can be said for us airline staff too.....

[PAXboy]

Despair

... but also those who set and influence policy.

Bearing in mind that those who set and influence policy are emphatically not in the aviation community.

This idea started out a couple of years ago to aid getting pax to the gate on time. It was to enable the carrier to locate folks in the bar and duty free. The tag would be removed at the gate and because it was 'friendly' towards the pax, it was thought that it would be accepted more easily.

Consumer and civil liberty orgs did not like it and so the idea moved to using the technology on suitcases to make tracking faster and removal from an a/c easier if pax did not show at the gate. Then the airports and carriers started arguing as to who would pay and are still arguing. Naturally, there is no argument as we will pay!

The RFID technology is now being marketed towards the govts as they have the money and control to direct it's uptake. I often say in these forums that govts always look for a technological solution to a human problem and do so again now. It is easier to apply information technology as a band-aid, without tackling the actual problem. For another example, see that the UK has just ordered a national databse of ALL children to share information between gov and local gov. It will cost £40m and will (I predict) do nothing towards saving children being abused.

Essentially, this project by UCL is simply another marketing exercise. I doubt that it will come to fruition due to cost and civil liberties. I would not support it for the simple reason that it will not work. If govts wish to continue fighting the war of 2001, then we probably cannot stop them but it would be better if they tried to fight the next war. Once again I repeat myself, the next major attack will not be via aircraft.

[Gouabafla]

That's my point, Agent X. If they start hassling pax even more, then it will, unfortnately, rebound on the staff who have face to face contact with Joe Public (who are not the people coming up with the daft ideas).

[20driver]

Tagging Passengers

This article smacks of the consultants syndrome. - Need work, convince some gov agency that you can improve security.To borrow from Mark Twain, "security is the refuge of the consultant"

I have being looking into this technology for other uses. The INS, or whatever they are called this week is testing RFID in some I-94's being issued at certain border stations. As they guy who gave me mine noted,it only tells us the piece of paper left the country, not that you did.

I think the airlines could use some form of this very usefully. Why can't we get a little pager like they give you in a restauraunt when you check in. You could be updated on gates, boarding etc. It would be perfect for boarding planes by rows or sections. If your thingy isn't beeping don't come up. Make the pager the boarding pass so you have a running head count.
Think of rebooking, they could check you tag and say, go have a seat, we'll call you when we need you.
Likewise it would allow you to go get some food during delays.
Also no more - i was in the bar and didn't hear the page!
The potential for luggage tracking is huge and could save a lot of money. It could also stop bags being put aside for "inspection" by baggage handlers.


As for airlines, yes they are stuck with the system but they could do a lot to make it easier on their customers. I really find it amazing that they all do the same, and have basically done very little to improve the flow of passengers from landside to airside.
I relate it all to the fact that we are totally captive to the airport and the airlines and effectively have no place to go.

20driver

[PAXboy]

20driver some airports and carriers are already using SMS (text mesgs) to your mobile (cell phone) for this. The reason is simple, a 'pager' costs money and will be broken/lost/damaged by the pax very quickly. I say this because, in my days as a telecomunications manger, people that were employed by the company and had a reasonable interest in the pager remaining serviceable - broke and lost them faster than I could guess.

Sending SMS is very, very cheap and can be set to get a read-receipt back to the source, so they know that you got the messgae. But, of course, the pax will state that they did not get it/ their battery was flat/ they gave the phone to the kids/ the kids took it without them knowing and the list of excuses goes on. Getting pax to the gate will remain an intractable problem. If they do not listen to P/As or read the info screens, they are not going to respond to text messages or pagers!

Now, for luggage tracking - RFID is a fabulous idea but no one wants to pay the money to install the infrastructure. Given that LHR T5 is being built new, it is the best opportunity to install it from Day One. Which means that they won't.

[Slavedriver]

yep, and a pager definitely wouldn't help me get to the gate on time because the lovely little device would be bleeping itself to death in a bin or maybe merrily drowning in the nearest toilet.

[Marsh Hawk]

/start sarcasm

Why not a subcutanaceous transmitter so there's no chance of losing it? It would make tracking you through the airport, on your flight, in your car, and in your home and daily life so much easier.

/end sarcasm

[Haven't a clue]

Originally Posted by PAXboy

Now, for luggage tracking - RFID is a fabulous idea but no one wants to pay the money to install the infrastructure.

Flew from Hong Kong last month and found an RFID thinghy stuck to my case - so it seems the ever efficient Asians are prepared to use (and pay for) the technology to track my luggage. Now that's clearly for my benefit (reducing the chance of a lost bag), and presumably theirs as well so no objection from me.

[W.R.A.I.T.H]

Originally Posted by PAXboy

But, of course, the pax will state that they did not get it/ their battery was flat/ they gave the phone to the kids/ the kids took it without them knowing and the list of excuses goes on. Getting pax to the gate will remain an intractable problem. If they do not listen to P/As or read the info screens, they are not going to respond to text messages or pagers!

Now you see, providing such herd animals with anything over basic service is throwing pearls before swines, no wonder everyone is reluctant to implement anything new. What works for me is call them on the PA, if they fail to turn up in five mins, close the gate, despatch the flight and have them reimburse you on luggage hassle involved. There just needs to be a clause at the bottom of the ticket/web page to warrant such policy.

[nivsy]

Interestingly, and apologies if off topic, but a considerable amount of passengers can be in transit using so called hubs over the world. If they are not used to such big airports and perhaps tight connection times, additional security (take LHR for example when in transit) and the time taken to walk to onward connection gates when moving walk ways are U/S (sorry lets take LHR again as an example) it really should come as no surprise that some reach the gates harassed, outside their comfort zone and in need of a drink (dare i say)

Ofcourse there should be no excuse for those who spend to much time in the bar or doing airport shopping - but its a catch 22 - after all its the latter two that helps airports make profit.

Nivsy

[Al Fakhem]

I would not at all mind tagging at airports, particularly if this is done for flights to and from the Indian sub-continent, where nearly each and every flight is delayed "as we are waiting for one more passenger to join" and subsequently "as one passenger is missing, we are now offloading his/her baggage, please bear with us". Result: you are 30 minutes late before even getting under way.

[Crepello]

Agreed - I'd have no problem with being tagged if it would reduce the chances of a "forgetful" passenger delaying my departure - which happens on every continent.

Taking it further, airlines could issue a separate tag for each item of checked bagged, and also tag baggage. Electronics at the destination could then correlate bags with their carriers and help people avoid claiming the wrong item of luggage.

I'm curious about those who object to pax-tagging... what do they get up to at airports? All of them? Maybe I'm missing out on something...

[Bangkokeasy]

Wake up guys! There is a HUGE difference between tagging luggage and tagging a human being!! And this difference is that the human being is sentient, while the luggage is totally incapable of navigating an airport without assistance.

From this FFs point of view, tagging of humans is never going to work. I for one, would refuse to be subjected to it. I don't know or care what other passengers get up to when they transit an airport and - you know what? IT IS NONE OF ANYONE ELSE'S BUSINESS. You contract to get on the plane at a given time and if you don't, then it is your own fault and you take the consequences.

Up to now, there has been widespread acceptance of the levels of inconvenience and intrusion that have been foisted on the travelling public in the name of security. This has been maintained, because anyone who steps out of line and voices dissent is regarded as out of step with the herd and worse, potentially endangering other SLF by their actions. It only takes a shift of opinion, so that a significant number of pax regard the inconvenience itself as the problem, for this whole deck of cards to come tumbling down. Personally, I can't wait for the day.

I say again, enough is enough.

[Crepello]

the human being is sentient, while the luggage is totally incapable of navigating an airport without assistance

Ah, but my point is that a minority of the travelling public are sadly less intelligent than their luggage...

if you don't, then it is your own fault and you take the consequences

Not quite right - if one pax is late at the gate and their bags have to be offloaded, everyone on that flight takes the consequences.

Tag us all, in the opinion of this FF. Just preferably not on the toes.