Views on new 'Nude' Xray at Airports

[Mr Pilot 2007]

I saw the new xray in operation in northern UK on tv.

Passengers (and crews)? scanned appear naked. They showed an image of a male and female. Both appeared naked.

The 'spokeswoman' for the airport or xray company, claimed passengers (and crews)? prefer the xray rather than being patted down.

I personally would prefer being patted down than scanned and appear naked on the xray operators screen.
They said the images are automatically deleted after a few seconds after each scan.

How full proof is that. It would only take a cellphone photo of the image to obtain a permanent photo.
Celebes should be worried.

I may well apply for the job myself if Jessica Alba will be travelling soon.

So what do you crews and paxs out there think of this.

How many of these scans per year until youve reached your quota. Some airports have three or more scanners each time you walk to your aircraft.

[Markdem]

I am no pilot, so I am not too sure what you guys (and girls I would guess) are into, but the images I have seen don't exactly get me excited, nor can I make out a face. Looks more like something out of a really bad movie..

MD

[cats_five]

If that's what it takes to ensure my safety that's fine with me. Anyone who gets excited over the images of my body has a problem. However, I'm sure it won't pick up the new fashion for carrying explosives internally.

[Doodles]

I read that the screen viewer is in a different room and cannot see the actual pax/crew member other than the screen image. Still, lots of potential for "abuse" I'd say but then again, if it speeds things up.....

[kriskross]

A friend of mine from Oz, a Captain, came through Manchester last year when they were trialing this, and his wife was put through the machine without him realising it and without her knowing what it was all about - she was newly pregnant at the time and my friend was very unhappy about his wife being put through the machine without being told what it was.

[NutLoose]

Well as under 18's are not going to be put through it, it's a farce really and another hole in the supposed system, there are plenty of would be 17 year olds bombers out there.

I suppose what you need if someone to start printing teeshirts or vests using the likes of lead or metallic based paint with comments on such as "F off Nosey" or the like after all it is concealed under your shirt etc
I Suppose we will now get hit by a burgeoning industry of tin foil underwear etc lol

I can seriously see this getting abused and no doubt will end up with another stupid TV programme like the Police stop dross we are subjected to in the name of so called entertainement.

[despegue]

They are using these scanners already in a lot of airports, including Moscow Domodedovo. No more putting off shoes, belts etc. Bliss.
I can't see what the big deal is honestly! As if no-one has ever seen you naked! Leave prudism in the 19th century with Queen Victoria please.

[Pelican]

For now I prefer to be patted down as well. This has nothing to do with the naked issue, it has to do with this being a new technology.

What are the long term health implications of it? What are the rays used anyway, are they X-rays for real? In that case, definately a big no thank you! As if flying does not expose you to enough radiation as it is.

Anybody know of any (independant) research about the effect of these machines?

Pat me down.

[HXdave]

i am travelling overseas soon and wish i was going through manchester, but alas i am not. personally, i dont know what people fear about going through this. after all (although i admit i have not seen the machine) it could have been concealed in a wall where it would have scanned EVERY passenger without anybody knowing whatsoever. as far as the health implications go, it is stated that being scanned 20 000 times by this machine is the equivalant of just 1 normal medical Xray. as for the security personnel monitering this machine - they are located remotely of the scanner in a totally different area of the airport, and have no visual or verbal communication with the people in the screening area. the person monitoring the screen confirms electronically to the security area that all is OK. another fear was using mobile phones to take images shown on screen - however manchester airport have advised that any staff member viewing the images will not be able to take any recording device whatsoever into the viewing room, and will be searched at the start of each shift.

personally, for those who do not like it - you have a choice - fly from another airport. and once every airport has them, your next option is to travel by sea / land!


all details included on manchester airport website :
Manchester Airport : T2 X-RAY TRIAL

[TurningFinals]

(image from BBC website)

These images aren't really that revealing. It's a pain having to undress everyday going through security, especially when its cold and you've got layers on. Personally i wouldn't mind having to go through these scanners.

[WHBM]

This has to be a paparazzi's charter. £1,000 for each shot of every celeb going through the scanner, be on the Internet in short time. Won't be able to trace who was the operator because all records are "automatically deleted after a few seconds".

Also wonder how that sample image got on the BBC website if the pics are indeed automatically deleted. There has to be a feed to get them out for that.

[shogan1977]

Kriskross

A friend of mine from Oz, a Captain, came through Manchester last year when they were trialing this, and his wife was put through the machine without him realising it and without her knowing what it was all about - she was newly pregnant at the time and my friend was very unhappy about his wife being put through the machine without being told what it was.

Your captain friend's wife could not possibly have gone through this or any other body imaging machine at Manchester Airport last year, as no such equipment was in place.

[skyloone]

Makes life easy

Have been through these at Schipol. Am not sure there is any alternative screening there actually? It does make life easy. My guess is the radiation levels would need to be much higher to affect an unborn child. One can take it as a given they did think of that. My understanding is that the individual scanning is at a remote location and only identifies objects for further checking... period. The image is stored until the local scanner staff clear the pax. Open to correction. Seems pretty good really. Get to see much more in any newspaper or magazine these days! Come on, how may of us have to have our bits checked by the doc once in awhile for the medical. To the ladies out there.. in childbirth, there can be half a dozen people in the room taking a very keen interest in your nether regions. Give me the scanner any day over someone patting my bits.

[Noxegon]

however manchester airport have advised that any staff member viewing the images will not be able to take any recording device whatsoever into the viewing room, and will be searched at the start of each shift.

Heh, with a pat-down or a trip through this machine?

[Max Angle]

I go through "security" every day going to work and would much rather have a scan than get an over zealous body check, some guys are really pretty intrusive and anything that reduces contact time with these people has got to be welcome. Couldn't care less about the image.

I am quite surprised that the charity who protested to Manchester (ARCH) over scans of children think its better for a child to be physically searched, in what can be quite an intimate way, by a complete stranger rather than have a quick and anonymous picture taken that is then destroyed. I am sure that the charity think they are "making a difference" but I can't help feeling there are many more important child welfare issues than this.

[raffele]

This thread:

http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...traveller.html

has further discussion on the subject, including the recent issue with regard to minors

[smiler68]

I cannot quite get my head around why people are even debating this issue. It's a no-brainer, would you prefer having the risk of being blown up at 38,000 feet over the atlantic in an alluminium tube, or instead letting some average joe/joanna, (who you will probably never see again in your lifetime), view an image of you which lets face it doesn't exactly appear 'clear'. This Xray screening has clearly been bought in to try and improve security and mitigate the bastards that take great joy in blowing us out of the sky, and yet there appear to be a fair few number of people who are instead worried about what they look like 'naked' - pathetic

[PENKO]

Good point Max Angle

My only concern, as others have voiced, is the technology. Is it proven enough to be safe, healthwhise? Some people have to go through this scan multiple times every day, week in, week out.

[overthewing]

I'm a little puzzled as to how this system gets co-ordinated.

Presumably the subject goes through the scanner, a remote operator spots something dodgy and...then what? Do they have to contact a security person on the spot and say "Have a look at that guy with the, er, trousers."? They can't identify by colour or clothing, after all. In fact, if the subject is a chap in a burkha, the security people may be puzzled by the 'guy' identifier to begin with.

Does this mean that each subject must wait until there's some kind of 'OK' signal? How much would that delay the process?

[fc101]

What's the radiation dose everytime you go through these? How many times per week would a crew member need to be X-rayed? Will security staff be X-rayed everytime they move in and out of the"secure" area?

fc101
E145 driver