On the BBC yesterday there was a story about some idiot trying to hijack an Alitalia flight with .... nail clippers.

Yet another thing that will be (again?) prohibited air-side - probably inconsistently throughout Europe and the Americas

Pregnant white Irish females?And profiling will magically render us invulnerable? If bearded Arab-looking men know that they are more likely to be searched thoroughly, will they will still be too stupid to find others to carry their contraband through?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piltdown Man http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
By preventing little old ladies from taking knitting needles onto aircraft? Seeing if six year old girls are carrying prohibited items on behalf of those they are travelling with?

Pregnant white Irish females?

A little more history on this one would be appreciated.

Try this:

Nezar Hindawi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But Nezar Hindawi wasn't picked up due to screening at the airport. It was due to people using some common sense. She was bought a one way ticket in cash by a suspicious man. She had already been identified as suspicious prior to arriving at the gate.

Horrible attitude
 

I just had very much the same experience. Short queues but the most foul woman directing people. Very rude and didn't even seem to notice her behaviour was unacceptable in a civilised environment. When I asked why she was so cheerful I got "I told you in English it is very simple" ! and all I did was stand in a line. Sadly visitors see this as the ugly face to the UK. :=

A couple of years ago friends of mine, two respectable well-dressed and well-behaved professional middle aged couples, flew LHR-YVR on BA in Club World through T5 which had only recently opened. The point I'm making is that they are not exactly the dregs of humanity!

Wife 1 was picked out for a random search. Fair enough. Husband 1 decided to wait until the search was done, not interfering, just waiting. I think that's fair enough too, but he was rudely told by a security 'official' to 'get moving, nothing to see here'. His reply was : "I believe I have a right to wait here until your colleague has finished with my wife. If I'm wrong, please call your supervisor to explain why I can't wait."

He was then told to : "Get going before I tell you in simple four letter words which you might find easier to understand ........"

The way that his ensuing complaint was dealt with by BAA was disgraceful, and by BA, exemplary, even though it was not their fault.

Although I rarely fly on BA, I have to say that I have always found every aspect of T5, including security, to be a joy. I don't know if I've been lucky or if others have been unlucky. In fact, if I did resume regular flying on BA, it would be because of T5.

The link in an earlier posting about photography and filming no longer works.

Here's the new one : Heathrow: Location filming and photography

What it carefully omits, is a specific statement about how they would deal with an individual taking a family photograph at the airport. By implication, my understanding is that this is not allowed and I wonder how the high-viz clipboard boys would deal with such a situation. Would they turn a blind eye, or would they use it as an excuse to bully and intimidate members of the public?

The rules are intended to prevent someone profiting commercially from filming on BAA premises without so much as asking. There was no intention to prevent anyone taking a family photo in the terminal. However given that many of the yellow jacket brigade are, shall we say, not possesed of a good sense of judgement, many enjoy stopping people doing what's not supposed to be against the rules. I have been screamed at on the ramp at LGW for daring to take a photo of a Dash 8 I was about to board, but most times people glance and see there is no harm.
What happens like all regulation, is that over time, it is vulnerable to mission creep and the law of unintended consequences.

Possibly .......... but nowhere does it expressly state that the intention is to regulate commercial photography and that private photography for personal records is allowed. Or am I missing something?

It really is all relative.

Mrs Strake and a Strakeling had a requirement to transit Domodedevo last week. In front of them at security was a family of Mum, Dad and two kids - all obviously inexperienced with the joys of air travel. They were from one of the CRS satellite countries and Russian was plainly not their first language. The procedure for taking off belts and shoes, etc was not understood. Ludmilla, the "arch" operator was being generally rude and unhelpful by shouting at them. Her final comment to the wife ,loosely translated, was "Go back again you stupid unthinking person and take your f*****g watch off..."

Now, about T5....?

The T5 lot seem to be getting slightly better. The obviously UK born (you can tell by looks and accent) are usually somewhat better than the rest. But still nowhere near as good as Nice.

Agreed, but if the intention was really to stop people taking photos, a sign saying "PHOTOGRAPHY PROHIBITED" would be up there tomorrow, along with an automatic voice barking orders.

Also regarding T5, I always thought that all gates had access to International Arrivals but I now hear that the stands used for domestics (~ 501-506) do not and arriving international passengers are bussed. Did things change or are they not able to keep the flow sterile, even given all arrivals and departures are segregated.

May have relayed this one before, and it was a while ago - but the outline is correct:

Quiet weekend afternoon, T5, very old and frail lady in a wheelchair accompanied by a nurse and a leather case nearly as old as her. Only me and them in the security channel. The bag was thinner and narrower than 'allowed' but maybe 2" longer. At the X-ray machine 'You'll have to go back and check it in.' The old lady did not really understand what was going on. The nurse asked (very politely) if an exception could not be made. 'No exceptions, etc'. I asked the screener if she had no discretion, and we immediately got into the 'if you talk to me like that you'll be in trouble' place. I walked away. I'm still ashamed, both that my country has such a mean and spiteful culture these days, and that I felt powerless to challenge her.

What do they do if the man being screened loses his trousers as a result of no belt? Especially if going commando........

It must have happened.....

Yes. A great deal is made now of:
"We take very seriously the right of our staff to work without intimidation and....etc.etc". Unfortunately there seems to be very little recognition that respect is a two way street. Instead this laudable duty-of-care principle for employees becomes a cloak of invincibility for the more high-handed and arrogant among them.

A sigh of exasperation when the tray keeps moving even while one is in the middle of retrieving one's possessions (yes, the particular infuriation of the T5 system)? One may as well be a drunk brandishing a broken bottle.

She probably had no idea what the word meant and reacted as if you'd asked if she had no underwear/deodorant/intelligence.

Exactly, and I've sometimes pointed this out to these boneheads. They don't see it.