Making things better for the passenger - Airport Security
Just another seat number
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NW UK
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VAFFPAX
LHR T2/T1 does NOT require you to take off your shoes.
Just another seat number
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NW UK
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not in the habit of voluntarily removing my shoes at security. This was a instruction, and it is quite usual to have one line at LHR removing shoes.
People who complain about stuff like that make me 
. Complaining for the sake of it.
And I don't think I have been through a checkpoint yet where the belt hasn't had to come off... and i fly a lot.. after all.. it is metal....
. Complaining for the sake of it.And I don't think I have been through a checkpoint yet where the belt hasn't had to come off... and i fly a lot.. after all.. it is metal....
. Just a quick wave over my goolies with the magic wand
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow...
Age: 53
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And maybe if we pax knew how the airport security muppets were going to interpret those rules we would know what not to take.
UFO
UFO
What's so bloody hard about that?
groundhand,
Airports have a de facto monopoly. This doesn't give them the right to b****r the passengers about. We have the EU ruling on delays that penalise the airlines: I'm saying we should have rules penalising the airport for its inefficiencies. Especially when those inefficiencies are caused by 'cost saving' i.e. not spending money where they need to.
Airports aren't like supermarkets, where if you don't like Sainsbury's, you can go to Waitrose or Tesco. In the south of the UK if you don't like BAA, that's it. Even if BAA is split up, to some extent, there will still be pseudo monopoly - basically, for many places, you'll have to use Heathrow - or not fly.
Which is why I argue that airport operators have a duty to provide a reasonable service - and it's arguable that BAA doesn't do that. Anyone know how much BAA gets per passenger (including charges for security)?
The best way to make them do their duty to the passengers is to introduce statutory penalties that pay the passenger, not the Treasury.
Airports have a de facto monopoly. This doesn't give them the right to b****r the passengers about. We have the EU ruling on delays that penalise the airlines: I'm saying we should have rules penalising the airport for its inefficiencies. Especially when those inefficiencies are caused by 'cost saving' i.e. not spending money where they need to.
Airports aren't like supermarkets, where if you don't like Sainsbury's, you can go to Waitrose or Tesco. In the south of the UK if you don't like BAA, that's it. Even if BAA is split up, to some extent, there will still be pseudo monopoly - basically, for many places, you'll have to use Heathrow - or not fly.
Which is why I argue that airport operators have a duty to provide a reasonable service - and it's arguable that BAA doesn't do that. Anyone know how much BAA gets per passenger (including charges for security)?
The best way to make them do their duty to the passengers is to introduce statutory penalties that pay the passenger, not the Treasury.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: OXF
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange that at T1 they ask you to remove your footwear. I have not had that at T1. Ever. And my most recent flight out of T1 was earlier this year. T2 was last w/e. No request there either.
But I have had it at T3.
S.
But I have had it at T3.
S.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consistency..........mmmmm
EDI to LHR T1 was last experience, and did want belt removed, but not shoes at EDI..... laptops stay in bags.
Hike to T3 - belts off for all, but security then only wanted some pax to remove shoes, but others were waved past to just go through and looking back to see if there was any rhyme or reason it was as stated previously, the screens were not being 'watched' in any consistent way. And laptops taken out please....
Returning (with another internal Turkish flight) to LHR from Istanbul - (...where it was belts off, laptops left in bags, shoes stay on...and you get scanned as you enter the terminal, as well as at the gate...at both Turkish airports) to arr. at T3 - nip to T1 to get back to EDI - this time no belt off, but shoes: 'oh, yes please, everyone has to.....'
So is there different policy in place for BAA sites then? Each site shouldn't be operating under varying rules in the area of security should they?
Going to be going through T5 (and then T3) on next trip so be interesting to see how that one works out.
EDI to LHR T1 was last experience, and did want belt removed, but not shoes at EDI..... laptops stay in bags.
Hike to T3 - belts off for all, but security then only wanted some pax to remove shoes, but others were waved past to just go through and looking back to see if there was any rhyme or reason it was as stated previously, the screens were not being 'watched' in any consistent way. And laptops taken out please....
Returning (with another internal Turkish flight) to LHR from Istanbul - (...where it was belts off, laptops left in bags, shoes stay on...and you get scanned as you enter the terminal, as well as at the gate...at both Turkish airports) to arr. at T3 - nip to T1 to get back to EDI - this time no belt off, but shoes: 'oh, yes please, everyone has to.....'
So is there different policy in place for BAA sites then? Each site shouldn't be operating under varying rules in the area of security should they?
Going to be going through T5 (and then T3) on next trip so be interesting to see how that one works out.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not difficult. Shoes, Belts laptops etc are checked on a ratio basis. 1 in 10 can be handled as 1 in 10 pax or 1 in 10 flights. Some you win and some You lose.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consistency? Forget it - dozens of countries, hundreds of airports all run by humans ... and sadly the organism is not a perfect form.
I see no point in getting uptight about security.. I've given up on big carry-on bags, I don't even bother trying to get a laptop on board any more... plastic belt, plastic watch, slip on shoes... my glasses, pen, cellphone, ipod, wallet, change all in the hand-carry well before security, shoes on/off , who cares? - how hard can that be...? Surly, rude staff? - water off a duck's back. I have a way better job than they have and I'll be out of here in an hour and they'll still be doing this all day today, and tomorrow, and the next day... You should feel sorry for them not irritated with them. And for the polite, professional, efficient security staff, a smile and a thankyou ain't too hard is it
Arrive a little earlier at the airport, chill and all this Security 'hassle' becomes a non-event.. Whatever they want to do... but just make sure my flight is as safe as it can be - and those other 40 parked out there also.
I see no point in getting uptight about security.. I've given up on big carry-on bags, I don't even bother trying to get a laptop on board any more... plastic belt, plastic watch, slip on shoes... my glasses, pen, cellphone, ipod, wallet, change all in the hand-carry well before security, shoes on/off , who cares? - how hard can that be...? Surly, rude staff? - water off a duck's back. I have a way better job than they have and I'll be out of here in an hour and they'll still be doing this all day today, and tomorrow, and the next day... You should feel sorry for them not irritated with them. And for the polite, professional, efficient security staff, a smile and a thankyou ain't too hard is it
Arrive a little earlier at the airport, chill and all this Security 'hassle' becomes a non-event.. Whatever they want to do... but just make sure my flight is as safe as it can be - and those other 40 parked out there also.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MAN
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the point is to catch terrorists, I'm not sure that consistency is that good an idea. They should not be able to predict exactly what will be searched and how.
I'm not a massively regular flier, probably 4 or 5 trips by air per year. But I've never experienced any problems at security anywhere - they always seem dispassionate to me.
My gripe would be this. If this is a war on terror, can we have a law against profiteering please? You can't take water through security and unlike the US there are no obvious water fountains, so if you want a drink you have to buy water. I was offered a small bottle of water for £2 at Manchester Airport last week. Meanwhile, there is no pick up point after the Glasgow attack, which is fair enough. When pick up was closed at what was my local US airport they opened the short stay car park and gave free parking for the first half hour. In Manchester they force you to park and charge you for it.
The overwhelming feeling I have is that new security measures are seen as a great way of gouging extra cash from the passengers, and that there is no restraining airport operators in this.
I'm not a massively regular flier, probably 4 or 5 trips by air per year. But I've never experienced any problems at security anywhere - they always seem dispassionate to me.
My gripe would be this. If this is a war on terror, can we have a law against profiteering please? You can't take water through security and unlike the US there are no obvious water fountains, so if you want a drink you have to buy water. I was offered a small bottle of water for £2 at Manchester Airport last week. Meanwhile, there is no pick up point after the Glasgow attack, which is fair enough. When pick up was closed at what was my local US airport they opened the short stay car park and gave free parking for the first half hour. In Manchester they force you to park and charge you for it.
The overwhelming feeling I have is that new security measures are seen as a great way of gouging extra cash from the passengers, and that there is no restraining airport operators in this.
Beausoleil said:
>The overwhelming feeling I have is that new security measures are seen as a great way of gouging extra cash from the passengers, and that there is no restraining airport operators in this.<
I agree!
Consistency: T5 Sunday April 20. No apparent photo, no removal of shoes.
150mL bottle medicine examined for pharmacy label,
checked against passport.
T5 Sunday April 27. Photographed, shoes removed. 150mL
bottle medicine examined for pharmacy label, and NOT
checked against passport.
I can remember those big bottles (about 1 pint!) of medicines.......that would cause trouble, but if the dose was say 1 tablespoon three times a day, it would need a big bottle.
>The overwhelming feeling I have is that new security measures are seen as a great way of gouging extra cash from the passengers, and that there is no restraining airport operators in this.<
I agree!
Consistency: T5 Sunday April 20. No apparent photo, no removal of shoes.
150mL bottle medicine examined for pharmacy label,
checked against passport.
T5 Sunday April 27. Photographed, shoes removed. 150mL
bottle medicine examined for pharmacy label, and NOT
checked against passport.
I can remember those big bottles (about 1 pint!) of medicines.......that would cause trouble, but if the dose was say 1 tablespoon three times a day, it would need a big bottle.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meanwhile, there is no pick up point after the Glasgow attack, which is fair enough
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Coalville
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who has been flying since the "good old days" of Dc-4's etc, it pains me to say it but.................ake the train it's a lot less hassle!
I've given up flying unless I have to, since Eurostar moved to St Pancras it's far easier to get to central Europe, and door to door not that much longer time wise - and you get treated like a human being!
I've given up flying unless I have to, since Eurostar moved to St Pancras it's far easier to get to central Europe, and door to door not that much longer time wise - and you get treated like a human being!
The Analog Kid
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pjcarr
All aviation security measures are implemented for a genuine, bona fide and legitimate reason
That's the funniest thing I've read on here in ages.
Paxing All Over The World
fyrefli
I think that you are bing unfair.
All aviation security measures are implemented for a genuine, bona fide and legitimate reason - the politicians craven need to pretend to be doing something.
That's the funniest thing I've read on here in ages.
All aviation security measures are implemented for a genuine, bona fide and legitimate reason - the politicians craven need to pretend to be doing something.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wales
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all you frequent fliers...think of us poor souls who work airside...EVERY day 3-5 times a day we go through exactly the same as you do...but we aren't anywhere near the plane!!
No butter/jam/frozen food (if it MAY contain a bit of water when unfrozen!) allowed through even to our staff room which is about 20 paces away from the security cone!
However just smile and get on with it...it isn't the security agents fault the DfT change their minds daily!
Belts on 4am...Belts off 6am
Shoes off 4am...shoes on 6am
Keys on RZ pass through scanner 4am...Keys on 7am
I just shrug, smile and get to work...to a MUCH nicer environment then they work in!
No butter/jam/frozen food (if it MAY contain a bit of water when unfrozen!) allowed through even to our staff room which is about 20 paces away from the security cone!
However just smile and get on with it...it isn't the security agents fault the DfT change their minds daily!
Belts on 4am...Belts off 6am
Shoes off 4am...shoes on 6am
Keys on RZ pass through scanner 4am...Keys on 7am
I just shrug, smile and get to work...to a MUCH nicer environment then they work in!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find threads like this quite amusing.
I work airside and unless any of you have the inside track on 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' and 99.9% of us do not have that knowledge then all that's left to complain about is the implementation of the procedures that are there to protect you from 'WHAT THE THREAT IS'. The only way anyone is going to progress this argument is by dealing with what you can deal with - as I say - the 'powers that be' know what they are up against - not one of you does I would venture.
The only thing anyone here should be arguing the toss about then is the cretinism displayed by the so called 'security officers' on the gates - I prefer 'operatives' because they are not 'officers'. Such stupidity should be challanged on every occasion - the more people who challange stupidity by the operatives means the less likely it is to occur to others. Stupid people back down quite quickly in my experience.
And don't trot out the same old tired crap about conspiracy theories and excuses to crack down on the innocent population at large - it just does not wash - local interpretation of objective rules is the only issue here.
If anyone posting on this forum from the few government departments that actually do know 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' would care to comment - and they won't obviously - then all of you should forget about ever arguing the toss about 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' because you don't need to know.
I work airside and unless any of you have the inside track on 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' and 99.9% of us do not have that knowledge then all that's left to complain about is the implementation of the procedures that are there to protect you from 'WHAT THE THREAT IS'. The only way anyone is going to progress this argument is by dealing with what you can deal with - as I say - the 'powers that be' know what they are up against - not one of you does I would venture.
The only thing anyone here should be arguing the toss about then is the cretinism displayed by the so called 'security officers' on the gates - I prefer 'operatives' because they are not 'officers'. Such stupidity should be challanged on every occasion - the more people who challange stupidity by the operatives means the less likely it is to occur to others. Stupid people back down quite quickly in my experience.
And don't trot out the same old tired crap about conspiracy theories and excuses to crack down on the innocent population at large - it just does not wash - local interpretation of objective rules is the only issue here.
If anyone posting on this forum from the few government departments that actually do know 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' would care to comment - and they won't obviously - then all of you should forget about ever arguing the toss about 'WHAT THE THREAT IS' because you don't need to know.