Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Mud Skipper - as much as I'm trying to look for the positives in the job these days, I really am starting to think you are 100% correct.............. 
Another example of what you are saying is the banning of dependants from the flight-deck......
What a disgrace of a country and a company we have become.
Another example of what you are saying is the banning of dependants from the flight-deck......
What a disgrace of a country and a company we have become.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bri
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Now im just asking so please dont abuse me.
Would it not make sense to be 'safe than sorry' cause I bet there is at least one pilot somewhere in the world that is a bit fanatical about his beliefs and cant wait to meet his maker.....
One more....
If the outside world believe pilots to be beyond security checks would that not encourage some terror group to send the boys in posing as pilots?
I am a police officer and when at the airport, I was searched by some three quid an hour security boff and when I say searched I mean, he put his hand all over me.... So, I do know how it feels and I dont like it but I also understand... better to be safe than sorry.
I know someone is gonna have a swipe at me for speaking
Would it not make sense to be 'safe than sorry' cause I bet there is at least one pilot somewhere in the world that is a bit fanatical about his beliefs and cant wait to meet his maker.....
One more....
If the outside world believe pilots to be beyond security checks would that not encourage some terror group to send the boys in posing as pilots?
I am a police officer and when at the airport, I was searched by some three quid an hour security boff and when I say searched I mean, he put his hand all over me.... So, I do know how it feels and I dont like it but I also understand... better to be safe than sorry.
I know someone is gonna have a swipe at me for speaking
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Why do some of you fly guys think you are above security ?. It's there to protect your asses at the end of the day, not the 3 quid an hour guy working the x-ray machine's ass - just like those Police Officers with the big guns too.
Did they not do that already on 11/09 ?.
would that not encourage some terror group to send the boys in posing as pilots?
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Did they not do that already on 11/09 ?.
At least one of them, Mohamed Al Atta, had a pilot's licence, and supposedly used this to request - and gain - entry to the flight deck, as an interested observer.
Access to the flight deck ever since - even to children, is now absolutely prohibited by most (if not all) airlines....even to our own family members!
I'm know that there are some people with very imaginative minds (even employed by airlines), who believe that "someone" with a basic knowledge of flying, and a stolen uniform, is somehow going to pass themself off as operating crew, to the others (real) crew operating the flight.
The mentality that has dreamt this up is somewhere around Infant school age, and totally unaware of how crew interact, and expect certain company procedures (wrt format of briefing, delegation of duties, etc, etc) to be followed, when dealing with each other, and with other company personnel.
"Ring-ins" would stand out like dog's b@lls in about the first 5 seconds.
A
nd in the Silk Air, and Egypt Air cases, did either of those 2 (from all knowledge) use a weapon?
No!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
No Leezyet, they didn't send boys in posing as pilots. They boarded as passengers, started slashing the throats of passengers and cabin crew until the pilots let them into the cockpit.
9/11 would not have been prevented, and will not be prevented again, by having background-checked, security pass-wearing pilots being harassed three or four times a day as to whether the paper-flight plan contains a sharp implement (!), Captain's tennis rackets being confiscated (!) or hassled as to why we are carrying diagrams in our brief-cases of airports.....!
Mate, we would just use the crash-axe on the other bloke if we were that way inclined. EVERYBODY knows that. But you know what? 99.99999999999999999999999% of blokes aren't that way inclined. So focus the resources where they NEED to be focused.
What planet are you on?
9/11 would not have been prevented, and will not be prevented again, by having background-checked, security pass-wearing pilots being harassed three or four times a day as to whether the paper-flight plan contains a sharp implement (!), Captain's tennis rackets being confiscated (!) or hassled as to why we are carrying diagrams in our brief-cases of airports.....!
Mate, we would just use the crash-axe on the other bloke if we were that way inclined. EVERYBODY knows that. But you know what? 99.99999999999999999999999% of blokes aren't that way inclined. So focus the resources where they NEED to be focused.
What planet are you on?
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Let me make my position a little clearer.......... I also think much of the petty security that is imposed at airports today is ill targeted, unnecessary, over the top and probably a complete waste of time. I too have fumed at being asked to take my shoes off, remove my lap top from its case and put it through seperately, take my belt off my trousers even before it has had a chance to set off the AMD. I also get fed up with the thieves charter in the USA which says you cannot make your personal items secure by locking your case.................................but
comments such as
'You might like to cite me just ONE instance of where an operating crew member has hijacked/attempted to his own aircraft.'
are pretty dumb. Before 9/11 no one could give an example of 2 a/c being deliberately flown into a high rise building, but it did happen didn't it.
Am I not right in thinking that there has been one instances at least of an airliner being crashed because the pilot wished to end it all?
Superpilot (no ego in that name is there!) to be a screener you have to give detailed background checks in way more depth than is required for flight deck or cabin crew, plus they have regular profficiency checks that if they fail, they are taken off line and re trained or sacked if they fail again.
FlyBlue I agree that the screener can be unpleasantly invasive, and in a past life I reported a guard that some of my staff had complained was 'too thorough'. Video evidence was checked, and without his knowing he was monitored for a week. At the end of it I was told that actually he was the only one performing the check as thoroughly as it should be!!
The current security regs are not pleasant for anyone, but I would feel unhappy getting on an aircraft knowing the crew hadn't been screened.
comments such as
'You might like to cite me just ONE instance of where an operating crew member has hijacked/attempted to his own aircraft.'
are pretty dumb. Before 9/11 no one could give an example of 2 a/c being deliberately flown into a high rise building, but it did happen didn't it.
Am I not right in thinking that there has been one instances at least of an airliner being crashed because the pilot wished to end it all?
Superpilot (no ego in that name is there!) to be a screener you have to give detailed background checks in way more depth than is required for flight deck or cabin crew, plus they have regular profficiency checks that if they fail, they are taken off line and re trained or sacked if they fail again.
FlyBlue I agree that the screener can be unpleasantly invasive, and in a past life I reported a guard that some of my staff had complained was 'too thorough'. Video evidence was checked, and without his knowing he was monitored for a week. At the end of it I was told that actually he was the only one performing the check as thoroughly as it should be!!
The current security regs are not pleasant for anyone, but I would feel unhappy getting on an aircraft knowing the crew hadn't been screened.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Well, Surely Not, surely you would be unhappy getting on an aircraft in Sydney International Airport, where 90% of airside workers continue to pass airside without being screened..... Just citing one example. The media got wind of this a few months ago, the pollies huffed and puffed and made all sorts of promises. And precisely NOTHING has changed, because the fixes would either be (a) costly or (b) extremely inconvenient. And it's not front page news anymore so the pressure's off.
For security to be respected, it has to be credible and logical. It is neither.
For security to be respected, it has to be credible and logical. It is neither.
Last edited by Ron & Edna Johns; 13th Jan 2006 at 09:39.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
i think a lot of people here are missing the point. We don't need to carry explosives, knives, box-cutters on board to gain access to the FD. The numpties in the airports don't seem to understand this. When i borad the a/c i turn er...left towards the flight deck as that is where the controls were last time i looked.
As far as airport security goes if you pay peanuts you get monkeys...
As far as airport security goes if you pay peanuts you get monkeys...
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Just to add had to laugh when at Athens recently the Capt had his nailclippers/nail file confiscated at security and was told that they'd be handed to the aircraft Captain who would carry them in the flight deck and returned to him after the flight. Eh! but i am the Captain he says, but this just didn't compute.
end result...nail clippers carried to the gate by security staff and er...handed to the same Captain on the flight deck to carry them for said flight.
end result...nail clippers carried to the gate by security staff and er...handed to the same Captain on the flight deck to carry them for said flight.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
The security checks are no there to prevent a pilot dieciding, as in Eygptair or Silk air examples, to nose dive. It can't do that. Nor will it prevent any act like that. But again the searches/screening isn't there for that reason.
It's already been pointed out that the idea is to stop a weapon or similar being passed to someone else. Again, it's been mentioned, if AQ. or similar think that crew are an easy route to get things airside they will use it.
Claiming that crew are holders of security passes, so the screening is unessesary is frankly neive. What depth do you think those checks go to? A Counter Terrorist Check, (in the UK)which only reveals a criminal record and if a person is suspected of being involved in terrorism. Not very helpful, of those involved in the tube bombings in the UK, only one would have come up with anything on that check.
Yes, airlines do their own background checks as many big companies do, but that can only go so far, and is easily fooled. Look at the number of reporters who have managed to get jobs at airports.
Deeper vetting is maybe one answer, but even thats not fool proof. Look at Blunt (MI5) and co.
So although it may seem a waste of time, there are reasons behind the searching of crew. It's not going to change, so maybe it's better to just let it go over your head.
It's already been pointed out that the idea is to stop a weapon or similar being passed to someone else. Again, it's been mentioned, if AQ. or similar think that crew are an easy route to get things airside they will use it.
Claiming that crew are holders of security passes, so the screening is unessesary is frankly neive. What depth do you think those checks go to? A Counter Terrorist Check, (in the UK)which only reveals a criminal record and if a person is suspected of being involved in terrorism. Not very helpful, of those involved in the tube bombings in the UK, only one would have come up with anything on that check.
Yes, airlines do their own background checks as many big companies do, but that can only go so far, and is easily fooled. Look at the number of reporters who have managed to get jobs at airports.
Deeper vetting is maybe one answer, but even thats not fool proof. Look at Blunt (MI5) and co.
So although it may seem a waste of time, there are reasons behind the searching of crew. It's not going to change, so maybe it's better to just let it go over your head.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Quote:
I am a police officer and when at the airport, I was searched by some three quid an hour security boff and when I say searched I mean, he put his hand all over me.... So, I do know how it feels and I dont like it but I also understand... better to be safe than sorry.
Dunno about your place, but in germany police officers do carry a gun and do have to go through screening to go airside...now tell me, why do I search for weapons if a guy has one at his belt OPENLY? What else would he carry? A nail clipper?
Its about time to get into a normal mode...at my homebase, we drive through a gate, then you are searched if you go to the right (socalled security area). Now the firebrigade is to the left, they are not searched. If they would have a job in the security area, they and their vehicles must be searched.
WHAT HAPPENED TO COMMON SENSE ?
Security, what a bitter joke...
I am a police officer and when at the airport, I was searched by some three quid an hour security boff and when I say searched I mean, he put his hand all over me.... So, I do know how it feels and I dont like it but I also understand... better to be safe than sorry.
Dunno about your place, but in germany police officers do carry a gun and do have to go through screening to go airside...now tell me, why do I search for weapons if a guy has one at his belt OPENLY? What else would he carry? A nail clipper?
Its about time to get into a normal mode...at my homebase, we drive through a gate, then you are searched if you go to the right (socalled security area). Now the firebrigade is to the left, they are not searched. If they would have a job in the security area, they and their vehicles must be searched.
WHAT HAPPENED TO COMMON SENSE ?
Security, what a bitter joke...
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
surely not you just don't get it, do you?! 
The aircraft in 911 were HIJACKED - but NOT by the crew.
Prior to 911, other aircraft had also been hijacked, however the recommended approach was one of obedient, non-confrontational compliance by the crew, with the hijacker(s).
And in those cases, did the suicidal pilot use a weapon? (Answer=NO).
Would a physical body search have found anything on that pilot that would have prevented the crash? (Answer=NO).
And it is to that sort of mentality that these checks are aimed.
Pax SEEING crew being screened.
What they DON'T see though, is what CAN harm them....the (terrorist) caterer who loads explosives in the galley trolley....the cleaner who plants explosives somewhere in the aircraft....the lame who leaves a weapon, or explosives, planted for one of the screened pax......the bloody great crash axe in the cockpit, accessable by all flight deck members.
But that's okay, because the security screeners have pulled the Captain's nail clippers, and the F/O's Swiss Army knife!
Feel secure in your naievete, surely not.
Before 9/11 no one could give an example of 2 a/c being deliberately flown into a high rise building, but it did happen didn't it.
Prior to 911, other aircraft had also been hijacked, however the recommended approach was one of obedient, non-confrontational compliance by the crew, with the hijacker(s).
Am I not right in thinking that there has been one instances at least of an airliner being crashed because the pilot wished to end it all?
Would a physical body search have found anything on that pilot that would have prevented the crash? (Answer=NO).
I would feel unhappy getting on an aircraft knowing the crew hadn't been screened.
Pax SEEING crew being screened.
What they DON'T see though, is what CAN harm them....the (terrorist) caterer who loads explosives in the galley trolley....the cleaner who plants explosives somewhere in the aircraft....the lame who leaves a weapon, or explosives, planted for one of the screened pax......the bloody great crash axe in the cockpit, accessable by all flight deck members.
But that's okay, because the security screeners have pulled the Captain's nail clippers, and the F/O's Swiss Army knife!
Feel secure in your naievete, surely not.
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Kaptin M I feel it is you that doesn't 'get it'.
The point re 'before 9/11' was to say that it was not in anyones belief that such an act could happen. I made no mention of who did what, just that prior to the tragedy no-one would have believed such an act likely. This was to answer a point made along the lines that just because there is no recorded instance of a crew member taking over their own plane it wont happen'. Clearer?
The reason for mentioning the suicidal crew was to show that even you Gods of the skies have colleagues who are capable of doing the unthinkable regardless of the consequences to others. The point wasn't connected (other than by you) with whether the crew had been screened or not, smuggled weapons or not. Clearer?
If you had read the first part of my post I think you would have found it read 'I also think much of the petty security that is imposed at airports today is ill targeted, unnecessary, over the top and probably a complete waste of time. I too have fumed at being asked to take my shoes off, remove my lap top from its case and put it through seperately, take my belt off my trousers even before it has had a chance to set off the AMD. I also get fed up with the thieves charter in the USA which says you cannot make your personal items secure by locking your case.
Naive I am certainly not, nor do I have absolute faith that there are no bad apples in the pilot community just because they fly the planes, which would be very naive IMO.
I have no problem with people disagreeing with my views but at least keep the response in the meaning of what was written.
The point re 'before 9/11' was to say that it was not in anyones belief that such an act could happen. I made no mention of who did what, just that prior to the tragedy no-one would have believed such an act likely. This was to answer a point made along the lines that just because there is no recorded instance of a crew member taking over their own plane it wont happen'. Clearer?
The reason for mentioning the suicidal crew was to show that even you Gods of the skies have colleagues who are capable of doing the unthinkable regardless of the consequences to others. The point wasn't connected (other than by you) with whether the crew had been screened or not, smuggled weapons or not. Clearer?
If you had read the first part of my post I think you would have found it read 'I also think much of the petty security that is imposed at airports today is ill targeted, unnecessary, over the top and probably a complete waste of time. I too have fumed at being asked to take my shoes off, remove my lap top from its case and put it through seperately, take my belt off my trousers even before it has had a chance to set off the AMD. I also get fed up with the thieves charter in the USA which says you cannot make your personal items secure by locking your case.
Naive I am certainly not, nor do I have absolute faith that there are no bad apples in the pilot community just because they fly the planes, which would be very naive IMO.
I have no problem with people disagreeing with my views but at least keep the response in the meaning of what was written.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: here
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I would feel unhappy getting on an aircraft knowing the crew hadn't been screened
in order to carry out our duties we need some items that would be forbidden at the security check...we do have them already on board anyway. I won't enumerate them because it would not be a good idea on a public Forum, but believe we do. But if that makes you feel better to know crew members are not hiding a deadly swiss knife in their shoes...
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I'm afraid you really ARE quite naieve wrt this subject, surely not - and why you persist in demonstrating that naievete time and time over, really had me wondering - until I read the little (envious) dig..."Gods of the skies" 
It might not have been in YOUR (naieve) belief, however in the late 1970's, a young British pilot by the name of Colin Foreman deliberately flew a Baron into the hangar of Connellan Airlines, in Australlia, killing a number of employees.
Prior to that, one must assume you had never heard of the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2.
In late 1999, a young Japanese passenger forcibly entered the cockpit of an All Nippon aircraft, killed the Captain by stabbing him, and then threatened to fly the B747 into the Rainbow Bridge in Tokyo.
What you mean is, YOU were unaware of ALL of these, yet you doggedly persist in displaying this naievete in post after post here.
"It is sometimes better to keep one's mouth shut, and APPEAR a fool, than to open it, and remove all doubt".
The point re 'before 9/11' was to say that it was not in anyones belief that such an act could happen.
Prior to that, one must assume you had never heard of the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2.
In late 1999, a young Japanese passenger forcibly entered the cockpit of an All Nippon aircraft, killed the Captain by stabbing him, and then threatened to fly the B747 into the Rainbow Bridge in Tokyo.
no-one would have believed such an act likely.
"It is sometimes better to keep one's mouth shut, and APPEAR a fool, than to open it, and remove all doubt".
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Shh... You know where!
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I'm afraid surely not, that I'm with Kaptin M on this one...
Any such bad apples do not need a weapon to take control of the the cockpit... They just wait until you go to the washroom, lock you out and they've cracked it.
How do you imagine that confiscating their nail clippers/scissors/Swiss army knife beforehand is going to affect the situation? And anyway, don't engineers have all kinds of dangerous stuff whilst airside as part of the tools of their trade? Can't they just give it to someone?
There is no joined up policy, because no such policy can usefully be made. It is a sop to the travelling public and most of us grudgingly accept that. Just don't expect me to be happy about it though.
nor do I have absolute faith that there are no bad apples in the pilot community just because they fly the planes
How do you imagine that confiscating their nail clippers/scissors/Swiss army knife beforehand is going to affect the situation? And anyway, don't engineers have all kinds of dangerous stuff whilst airside as part of the tools of their trade? Can't they just give it to someone?
There is no joined up policy, because no such policy can usefully be made. It is a sop to the travelling public and most of us grudgingly accept that. Just don't expect me to be happy about it though.
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I stand corrected I-Ford, I was alive for all those events yet remembered not one of them
Capt Cat I am aware of what a crew need to carry on board for their duties thks, and yes it is silly that corkscrews etc have been confiscated. That said I still see no reason why crew shouldn't go through a security check.
Kaptin M you are quite pompous at times aren't you. Yes I knew of the Kamikaze pilots in WW2 but didn't equate military pilots flying military aircraft at highly armed ships with commercial airliners flown at unprotected static buildings.
No I wasn't aware the UK pilot in Oz, but it probably didn't get reported in UK.
Naive you say simply because I differ with you?? Envious? No, it was sarcasm at how some of the pilot fraternity come across to non flyers in aviation
Can you guys not read?? Nail clippers and such like would fall into the category of pointless over the top security that I agree is a waste of time.........read the post don't scan over it!!!!!!
Capt Cat I am aware of what a crew need to carry on board for their duties thks, and yes it is silly that corkscrews etc have been confiscated. That said I still see no reason why crew shouldn't go through a security check.
Kaptin M you are quite pompous at times aren't you. Yes I knew of the Kamikaze pilots in WW2 but didn't equate military pilots flying military aircraft at highly armed ships with commercial airliners flown at unprotected static buildings.
No I wasn't aware the UK pilot in Oz, but it probably didn't get reported in UK.
Naive you say simply because I differ with you?? Envious? No, it was sarcasm at how some of the pilot fraternity come across to non flyers in aviation
Can you guys not read?? Nail clippers and such like would fall into the category of pointless over the top security that I agree is a waste of time.........read the post don't scan over it!!!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
No Leezyet, they didn't send boys in posing as pilots. They boarded as passengers, started slashing the throats of passengers and cabin crew until the pilots let them into the cockpit.
You ladies and gents that fly the a/c have rules and regs that you have to adhere to and so do those pieces of cr@p that are just there to hassle you and give you grief but are usless in reality as many of you claim. Many of you wouldn't dream of breaking those rules and regs and they don't either as you and they risk loosing their jobs and nobody wants that.
You all chose to work in the industry so have to accept that security screening is a major part of it, so rather than hassling those low paid chaps on the screening points, why not just go with the flow and get on with it, it actually takes more time to argue with them than it would to go with the flow. If you don't agree with something, then don't take things with you that might cause a problem - Do you really need nail clippers - why not cut them at home before you go, or why not write to the authorities and put your point forward rather then taking it out on the people who cannot do anything about it.
Rotate on this!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
My understanding of the issue is that crew being screened, (and being seen to be screened), has less to do with any perceived threat that they pose, rather it was to show 'one avenue of threat had been closed'. An illustration of this would be the kidnapping/threat of harm to a crews family if "you don't carry this weapon through the check point and then pass it to my colleague we will kill your family".
If there are no checks this becomes a very viable and frankly very frightening means to get weapons airside.
Before I get bombarded with "what about a/c cleaners/caterers etc I would reiterate...."ONE avenue of threat has been closed"....not all.
I suspect however the people checking don't even realise this and fail to treat crew with the courtesy that they deserve.
If there are no checks this becomes a very viable and frankly very frightening means to get weapons airside.
Before I get bombarded with "what about a/c cleaners/caterers etc I would reiterate...."ONE avenue of threat has been closed"....not all.
I suspect however the people checking don't even realise this and fail to treat crew with the courtesy that they deserve.