I Don't believe it! Common sense1!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just come back from the most secure airport in the world. Ben Gurion Airport, Tel Aviv.
The screening for crew took 5 minutes max. No shoes off, no pat downs, laptop out but nothing else, but more importantly all of us were profiled.
Last time I operated as crew into the USA at least 30 mins and lots of faffing around.
How many aircraft have been hijacked from there? None.
The screening for crew took 5 minutes max. No shoes off, no pat downs, laptop out but nothing else, but more importantly all of us were profiled.
Last time I operated as crew into the USA at least 30 mins and lots of faffing around.
How many aircraft have been hijacked from there? None.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely spot on, pre-screening and profiling is the way forward, not this fiasco we currently have, both in the UK and US I might add.
If I had the inclination to bring down an aircraft there would be a smoking hole in the ground. Thankfully I don't.
The whole system needs a rethink, it's far too tied up in political corectness and bureaucracy that it has defeated the purpose it was originally intended for.
If I had the inclination to bring down an aircraft there would be a smoking hole in the ground. Thankfully I don't.
The whole system needs a rethink, it's far too tied up in political corectness and bureaucracy that it has defeated the purpose it was originally intended for.
I don't believe it!
What I don't believe is that 411A failed to comment on the fact that it is the Chairman of -gulp! - British Airways who has raised the issue!
Jack
What I don't believe is that 411A failed to comment on the fact that it is the Chairman of -gulp! - British Airways who has raised the issue!
Jack
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm consistently amazed how different it can be within individual airports
Take JFK - inbound BA T7, if you're in a premium cabin and can overtake the laggards, immigration has never taken me more than 20 minutes as a Brit. On one occasion, I was 5th off a Jumbo (upper deck) and was in a cab 15 minutes later, including picking up a bag! On the way out, premium security line again at T7 is a breeze.
And then you suddenly find yourself having to go through T4....
!
Take JFK - inbound BA T7, if you're in a premium cabin and can overtake the laggards, immigration has never taken me more than 20 minutes as a Brit. On one occasion, I was 5th off a Jumbo (upper deck) and was in a cab 15 minutes later, including picking up a bag! On the way out, premium security line again at T7 is a breeze.
And then you suddenly find yourself having to go through T4....
!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And now the transport minister has taken the worst possible decision of leaving it to individual airports to decide how to best improve the customer experience.
Undoubtably this will mean anal probes at Luton and Manchester, shoes to be hung from your ears in Bristol, and an exception to the no knife rule for registered neds at Glasgow.
Why can the Department against Transport not just take it's responsibilities seriously and define exactly what security procedures are to be implemented at every airport across the country with absolutely no scope for personal tweaking by over or under zealous security managers and staff.
Undoubtably this will mean anal probes at Luton and Manchester, shoes to be hung from your ears in Bristol, and an exception to the no knife rule for registered neds at Glasgow.
Why can the Department against Transport not just take it's responsibilities seriously and define exactly what security procedures are to be implemented at every airport across the country with absolutely no scope for personal tweaking by over or under zealous security managers and staff.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help but think of that old saying when I think of the state of the U.S. today. Not that al Queda is harmless, but how badly did we end up hurting ourselves?
Terrorism has been defined as “the deliberate use of violence, or threat of its use, against innocent people, with the aim of intimidating them, or other people, into a course of action they otherwise would not take.”
Why do we continue to allow them to succeed in this aim?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MountainBear
Maybe time to rethink your bad guys trying to get in policy.
Man arrested over 'terror plot' to bomb Washington DC trains - Telegraph
Maybe time to rethink your bad guys trying to get in policy.
Man arrested over 'terror plot' to bomb Washington DC trains - Telegraph
U.S. Attorney Neil MacBride said in a statement that it was "chilling that a man from Ashburn is accused of casing rail stations with the goal of killing as many Metro (subway) riders as possible through simultaneous bomb attacks".
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What 411A fails to realise is that the USA went overboard after 9/11. Before then, the rest of the world had been experiencing terrorism (some funded by USA citizens by the collections in "Irish" pubs) and had got used to security checks.
No, the USA in typical arrogant fashion carried on with no airport security (your friends could accompany you, unchecked, to the departure gate).
After 9/11 they panicked, created the monstrosity called the TSA (initially the most amateur, over-powered agency it was possible to imagine), and proceeded to lecture the rest of the world on security procedures. These procedures, as the Chairman of BA has commented, are often not carried out on US domestic flights. And what were the 9/11 fllights - domestic flights?
Septics - don't you love 'em.
Fred
No, the USA in typical arrogant fashion carried on with no airport security (your friends could accompany you, unchecked, to the departure gate).
After 9/11 they panicked, created the monstrosity called the TSA (initially the most amateur, over-powered agency it was possible to imagine), and proceeded to lecture the rest of the world on security procedures. These procedures, as the Chairman of BA has commented, are often not carried out on US domestic flights. And what were the 9/11 fllights - domestic flights?
Septics - don't you love 'em.
Fred
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(your friends could accompany you, unchecked, to the departure gate).
And domestic screening is exactly the same as international.
What a pitiful forum this has become.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Greece
Age: 84
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ He probably confused departure with arrivals. (A small matter for SLF, little bit bigger if you are a pilot)
The President of British Airways is an IDIOT.
you do HAVE to check shoes -pander to the masses all you like.
The President of British Airways is an IDIOT.
you do HAVE to check shoes -pander to the masses all you like.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some confusion here..
Having heard the man make his point on the radio on the day it reported, I think there is some confusion of what he said by people who clearly did not listen to it. He was complaining about the removal of shoes, belts, etc. prior to departure. This has been enacted worldwide to allay fears generated by people who have attempted to commit suicide and take as many others, preferably American infidels, with them, although the Americans will presumably be turned away at the entry gates to the paradise they delude themselves into thinking they will be going to. I daresay that if paradise is populated with even a small percentage of actual or potential suicide bombers then I and many others would think very seriously before deciding whether or not to go in.
It seems to me that he has a legitimate beef. This costly and ineffective activity has given a lot of companies an opportunity to employ otherwise unemployable *rseh*les at low wages to act out their fantasies of totalitarian state police. I have had more than enough of the humourless and stupid attitude of these people who delight in subjecting people who well outrank them in almost every human virtue to meaningless humiliation. I now take my holidays at home and rarely travel internationally. I doubt that I am alone in this, indeed, as I am usually accompanied by my wife there are two of us who have cut down our travel by air to almost zero. I am sure there are many more. This can do no good to the airline industry, it imposes huge costs, and diminishes their turnover. You can see why they complain. As others have pointed out, El Al and Tel Aviv have been coping with this problem for far longer and to much greater effect with less interference than imposed elsewhere.
Then there are the indignities and pointless rituals involved in immigration. So far as I can see this is a matter to be decided by the competent authorities of the state being entered. If it has been decided by them that non-nationals may only enter their borders completely naked with their genitals painted fluorescent orange and a telescope up their fundament then that is their prerogative. I shan't be going there in such a case, and it will only be their loss.
It seems to me that he has a legitimate beef. This costly and ineffective activity has given a lot of companies an opportunity to employ otherwise unemployable *rseh*les at low wages to act out their fantasies of totalitarian state police. I have had more than enough of the humourless and stupid attitude of these people who delight in subjecting people who well outrank them in almost every human virtue to meaningless humiliation. I now take my holidays at home and rarely travel internationally. I doubt that I am alone in this, indeed, as I am usually accompanied by my wife there are two of us who have cut down our travel by air to almost zero. I am sure there are many more. This can do no good to the airline industry, it imposes huge costs, and diminishes their turnover. You can see why they complain. As others have pointed out, El Al and Tel Aviv have been coping with this problem for far longer and to much greater effect with less interference than imposed elsewhere.
Then there are the indignities and pointless rituals involved in immigration. So far as I can see this is a matter to be decided by the competent authorities of the state being entered. If it has been decided by them that non-nationals may only enter their borders completely naked with their genitals painted fluorescent orange and a telescope up their fundament then that is their prerogative. I shan't be going there in such a case, and it will only be their loss.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He also mentioned the question of removing laptops from a bag and sending it through separately. Now, I had a conversation with one of the security people on that subject (a real one, not a row! 
) asking how come they'd gone back to asking for them to be removed at Heathrow when there was a spell where they could be kept in the bag. His answer, for what it's worth, was that it caused more delays because of bags having to be checked and re-scanned so often when something showed up on the screen.
In other words, the decision to revert to laptops being screened separately was less to do with security as such, and more to do with speed.
) asking how come they'd gone back to asking for them to be removed at Heathrow when there was a spell where they could be kept in the bag. His answer, for what it's worth, was that it caused more delays because of bags having to be checked and re-scanned so often when something showed up on the screen. In other words, the decision to revert to laptops being screened separately was less to do with security as such, and more to do with speed.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huck you are wrong. Pre 9/11 there was no check at all for Domestic Flights. Your friends could accompany you unchecked to the gate. I know because I have done it.
And the security for domestic flightss is different as Mr Broughten says. Last week on a domestic flight from SFO my laptop stayed in my carry on bag. On the subsequent International flight out of LAX my laptop was taken out of the bag by the TSA man and put through the X-Ray seperately. (I, because of my experience in SFO, had left it in the bag.)
And the security for domestic flightss is different as Mr Broughten says. Last week on a domestic flight from SFO my laptop stayed in my carry on bag. On the subsequent International flight out of LAX my laptop was taken out of the bag by the TSA man and put through the X-Ray seperately. (I, because of my experience in SFO, had left it in the bag.)
Buttonpusher
So fred 737, please correct me if I'm wrong, I understand your personal experiences, but could you elaborate further ?
You have bypassed the metal detector, and ID check pre 9/11 ? (you used the word unchecked).
Secondly do the "security" people have different procedures for international and domestic passengers all while going through the metal detector?
If all this is true, it's all news to me as I always have to take out my computer at the metal detector whether it's the US or UK, domestic or international, plus I have put up with going through metal detectors for the past 20+ years as a pilot, when I could have posed as someone seeing a friend off for at least ten of them. Dammit.........
Apologies for the thread drift.
You have bypassed the metal detector, and ID check pre 9/11 ? (you used the word unchecked).
Secondly do the "security" people have different procedures for international and domestic passengers all while going through the metal detector?
If all this is true, it's all news to me as I always have to take out my computer at the metal detector whether it's the US or UK, domestic or international, plus I have put up with going through metal detectors for the past 20+ years as a pilot, when I could have posed as someone seeing a friend off for at least ten of them. Dammit.........
Apologies for the thread drift.
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(your friends could accompany you, unchecked, to the departure gate).
But ANYONE allowed to the gates in the U.S. where Part 121 operations were conducted have been screened since about 1974. Your memory is just wrong. If non-passengers went to the departure gates prior to 9/11, they went through screening. My wife and child used to see me off there, and they were screened first.
As to domestic v. international - no difference there either. Laptops out, shoes off. It's been that way since the friday after 9/11. If you didn't do these things recently then it was against the rules. Look it up on the TSA website.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Birminham
Age: 46
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRayner
I have had more than enough of the humourless and stupid attitude of these people who delight in subjecting people who well outrank them in almost every human virtue to meaningless humiliation.
I have had more than enough of the humourless and stupid attitude of these people who delight in subjecting people who well outrank them in almost every human virtue to meaningless humiliation.
I am amazed at the attitude displayed by some people here. The personality and attitudes of security staff, and any other member of staff in the airport for that matter, are totally irrelevant. Most of them are probably working long hours for little pay doing a very tedious repetitive job and coping with abuse from passengers. No wonder some of them are humourless. However, I've encountered many such people who have been a joy to meet and chat to. To suggest that these staff are`outranked' by most of the people they are providing a service for demonstrates complete arrogance. I expect that you believe you should be allowed to drive right up to the aircraft and climb aboard at your convenience rather than go through the hassle and humiliation of checking in, security, passport control etc.
I struggle to understand why anyone would feel humiliated when being asked to remove their belt or shoes or take a laptop out of its bag. These measures are for the good and safety of everybody. And it should be the departure airport that decides what level of security is appropriate. After all we are trying to prevent ourselves being blown up whilst in the air, not from being attacked by fellow passengers once we have entered the destination country.
The real issue is whether the current measures are effective or not, and whilst I am certainly no expert, I suspect that removing belts and shoes adds little to the chance of preventing a potential threat. However I am more than happy to continue doing so until there is evidence that this is of no security benefit whatsoever. As I implied in an earlier post, if I were in charge I would have all passengers and hand baggage scanned again on entering the departure lounge immediately before boarding the aircraft. And if there was evidence that removing all clothing was necessary then so be it (of course in private cubicles or that would be humiliating).
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Angels 20 and climbing
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's quite interesting about airport/aviation security is that the additional measures brought in - don't seem to apply to other sectors.
Eg
Liquids - failed plot = ban on liquids
Underwear bomber - failed plot = 3D scanners
Shoe bomber - failed plot = take off shoes
yet
Rucksack bombs on tube, bus and Madrid train - (52 dead London, 191 dead Madrid) - but no scanners, sniffers or ban on rucksacks were brought in??
(happy to be corrected if there are indeed airport-style security gates in Spanish train stations).
Eg
Liquids - failed plot = ban on liquids
Underwear bomber - failed plot = 3D scanners
Shoe bomber - failed plot = take off shoes
yet
Rucksack bombs on tube, bus and Madrid train - (52 dead London, 191 dead Madrid) - but no scanners, sniffers or ban on rucksacks were brought in??
(happy to be corrected if there are indeed airport-style security gates in Spanish train stations).
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Enhanced" security at LHR/T5
I went through the security check at LHR T5 yesterday while en route to DUS. My hand baggage containing my working tools, together with my top coat and jacket, all went through the X-ray machine without any quibbles. I had divested myself of all metallic substances prior to passing through the arch with no problems whatsoever.
Fifty metres further on, beyond the security check, I was pounced upon by three young security lads, who told me I had been "selected for a random check" in the new super 3-D scanner device.
They were almost orgasmic in their excitement when they discovered that my watch, change purse, belt buckle and so forth showed up on their screen, and they demanded an explanation from me.
They could not understand that the first thing that most passengers - having passed through the main security check - will naturally do is to restore their personal comforts!
All joking aside, I despair at the idiocy exhibited by these so-called security "officers".
Fifty metres further on, beyond the security check, I was pounced upon by three young security lads, who told me I had been "selected for a random check" in the new super 3-D scanner device.
They were almost orgasmic in their excitement when they discovered that my watch, change purse, belt buckle and so forth showed up on their screen, and they demanded an explanation from me.
They could not understand that the first thing that most passengers - having passed through the main security check - will naturally do is to restore their personal comforts!
All joking aside, I despair at the idiocy exhibited by these so-called security "officers".
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Airport security changes pat-down procedure
Airport security changes pat-down procedure | democratandchronicle.com | Democrat and Chronicle
And ...
Body scanners unveiled at JFK Airport; Homeland Security Sect. Janet Napolitano doesn't volunteer
Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images | Privacy Inc. - CNET News
Airport security changes pat-down procedure
Airport security changes pat-down procedure | democratandchronicle.com | Democrat and Chronicle
And ...
Body scanners unveiled at JFK Airport; Homeland Security Sect. Janet Napolitano doesn't volunteer
Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images | Privacy Inc. - CNET News
Last edited by jcjeant; 29th Oct 2010 at 22:02.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MAN
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't say I've ever had any problems with security people at airports. A lot of the complaints sound like people being asked to do things by other people they feel superior to for some reason - they don't like the feeling of superiority being threatened since it impacts their feeling of self worth - all very sad. US immigration officers also all seem very polite to me.
I did think it was funny to hear an airline chief complain about a safety system being redundant. Isn't redundancy one of the things that makes air travel so safe - like "redundant" hydraulic systems?
I did think it was funny to hear an airline chief complain about a safety system being redundant. Isn't redundancy one of the things that makes air travel so safe - like "redundant" hydraulic systems?