Airport Security (Merged) - Effects on Crew/Staff
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Northport, NW England
Age: 44
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2ps worth.
Profiling - Good Idea - Lets take a look at the israelis methods but I'd recommend stopping short of descimating any neighbouring nations.
Bernouilli - I cannot understand your point of view. Fine, I accept someone may be "turned", but I don't think they'll be using some colgate and a Nokia to carry out their mission. I could be stark b"£$$ock naked in the flight deck and still be a threat.
Unfortunately I believe that where we are now is a untenable security situation that is starting to a commercially impact the viability of air travel to an extent that some airlines are begginning to employ "uncertainty" measures and is threatening the livelyhoods of thousands of British workers.
We have to accept that with any security regime THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A THREAT and if someone really wants to get to an aircraft - put something aboard it THEY WILL GET THROUGH eventually.
These current measures whilst pleasing to the eyes of the public/buraucrats etc.. are really quite dumb.
The measures are inconsistent, depend on which airport you are flying from and it would appear that each facility has added their UNIQUE stamp to them. i.e. at LPL now cars cannot use the pick up/drop off lanes..... they are a threat....but Black cabs....sure they are ok!! See my point.
At humberside we are told to check our overnight bags in, but we are then told once we get airside we can collect them from the baggage system to place them where we wish on the aircraft. ....again Whats the Point??
WoT
Bernouilli - I cannot understand your point of view. Fine, I accept someone may be "turned", but I don't think they'll be using some colgate and a Nokia to carry out their mission. I could be stark b"£$$ock naked in the flight deck and still be a threat.
Unfortunately I believe that where we are now is a untenable security situation that is starting to a commercially impact the viability of air travel to an extent that some airlines are begginning to employ "uncertainty" measures and is threatening the livelyhoods of thousands of British workers.
We have to accept that with any security regime THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A THREAT and if someone really wants to get to an aircraft - put something aboard it THEY WILL GET THROUGH eventually.
These current measures whilst pleasing to the eyes of the public/buraucrats etc.. are really quite dumb.
The measures are inconsistent, depend on which airport you are flying from and it would appear that each facility has added their UNIQUE stamp to them. i.e. at LPL now cars cannot use the pick up/drop off lanes..... they are a threat....but Black cabs....sure they are ok!! See my point.
At humberside we are told to check our overnight bags in, but we are then told once we get airside we can collect them from the baggage system to place them where we wish on the aircraft. ....again Whats the Point??
WoT
Registered User **
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: London
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"brakedwells post is very interesting, even if it is taken from the Guardian, which is somewhere below the Viz is terms of journalistic accuracy."
"Carnage Matey" (sic) then proceeds to acknowledge that the substance of the article is borne out by his (no doubt impressive) experience.
By now we should be used to seeing this sort of foaming-at-the-mouth blanket prejudice against journalism here. Given that the Guardian and Observer are still the only newspapers (as far as I'm aware) which aren't owned by robber barons whose primary interests are their own wallets, perhaps greater objectivity is to be obtained by reading the Daily Mail, or watching Fox Television.
I have previously tried to point out here that there's something that rings false about the general coverage of this story, and that there is evidence of this in reputable sources (such as saag.org). However my posts have been removed. I wonder how long this one will last?
No doubt there was/is a conspiracy of some kind. No doubt some of the information released so far is accurate. However it pays to remember, to mention 5 recent examples only:
1) Tanks at Heathrow (pre Iraq invasion)
2) Brazilian electrician in bombjacket, leaping barriers.
3) Ricin "plot".
4) The "Jihadi Brothers" (one shot).
5) "WMD"
In each case the media, in the main (and initially including the above mentioned publications) faithfully reported the government/police early press briefings, which in each case proved to be almost completely fictitious! It's a general principle of propaganda (aka "spin") that people only remember the initial disinformation, and seldom the retractions or petering-out of the non-story. So deliberate exaggeration is a simple, reliable and useful strategy. We live in a time when this has reached epidemic proportions; let's be grateful that not all journalists are prepared to take government PR, or public hysteria, at face value.
And just to make it clear: I have NO SYMPATHY with the kind of bigoted maniacs who try to kill innocent people by any means at all. Neither do I have any sympathy with governments who, whilst claiming to act in the national interest, actually implement policies and disinformation strategies which compound the very problems which they purport to address.
"Carnage Matey" (sic) then proceeds to acknowledge that the substance of the article is borne out by his (no doubt impressive) experience.
By now we should be used to seeing this sort of foaming-at-the-mouth blanket prejudice against journalism here. Given that the Guardian and Observer are still the only newspapers (as far as I'm aware) which aren't owned by robber barons whose primary interests are their own wallets, perhaps greater objectivity is to be obtained by reading the Daily Mail, or watching Fox Television.
I have previously tried to point out here that there's something that rings false about the general coverage of this story, and that there is evidence of this in reputable sources (such as saag.org). However my posts have been removed. I wonder how long this one will last?
No doubt there was/is a conspiracy of some kind. No doubt some of the information released so far is accurate. However it pays to remember, to mention 5 recent examples only:
1) Tanks at Heathrow (pre Iraq invasion)
2) Brazilian electrician in bombjacket, leaping barriers.
3) Ricin "plot".
4) The "Jihadi Brothers" (one shot).
5) "WMD"
In each case the media, in the main (and initially including the above mentioned publications) faithfully reported the government/police early press briefings, which in each case proved to be almost completely fictitious! It's a general principle of propaganda (aka "spin") that people only remember the initial disinformation, and seldom the retractions or petering-out of the non-story. So deliberate exaggeration is a simple, reliable and useful strategy. We live in a time when this has reached epidemic proportions; let's be grateful that not all journalists are prepared to take government PR, or public hysteria, at face value.
And just to make it clear: I have NO SYMPATHY with the kind of bigoted maniacs who try to kill innocent people by any means at all. Neither do I have any sympathy with governments who, whilst claiming to act in the national interest, actually implement policies and disinformation strategies which compound the very problems which they purport to address.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I flew out of Heathrow Thursday, the day after the new regulations were introduced (smaller bag, no liquids etc).
When I arrived and unpacked my suitcase I couldn't find my toiletries bag containing deodorant, shaving gel, moisturiser and after shave. Where was it?
In my nav bag (hand luggage) that had passed through Heathrow's 'security' checks.
When I arrived and unpacked my suitcase I couldn't find my toiletries bag containing deodorant, shaving gel, moisturiser and after shave. Where was it?
In my nav bag (hand luggage) that had passed through Heathrow's 'security' checks.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Up in the air
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by World of Tweed
Bernouilli - I cannot understand your point of view. Fine, I accept someone may be "turned", but I don't think they'll be using some colgate and a Nokia to carry out their mission. I could be stark b"£$$ock naked in the flight deck and still be a threat.
Unfortunately I believe that where we are now is a untenable security situation that is starting to a commercially impact the viability of air travel to an extent that some airlines are begginning to employ "uncertainty" measures and is threatening the livelyhoods of thousands of British workers.
We have to accept that with any security regime THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A THREAT and if someone really wants to get to an aircraft - put something aboard it THEY WILL GET THROUGH eventually.
These current measures whilst pleasing to the eyes of the public/buraucrats etc.. are really quite dumb.
Unfortunately I believe that where we are now is a untenable security situation that is starting to a commercially impact the viability of air travel to an extent that some airlines are begginning to employ "uncertainty" measures and is threatening the livelyhoods of thousands of British workers.
We have to accept that with any security regime THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A THREAT and if someone really wants to get to an aircraft - put something aboard it THEY WILL GET THROUGH eventually.
These current measures whilst pleasing to the eyes of the public/buraucrats etc.. are really quite dumb.
Give me a frigging break that someone is going to "turn" a crewmember. Bernoulli is grasping at straws here. If this is correct, then a policeman could be turned, a fuel tank truck driver could be turned, a ocean going supertanker Captain could be turned. Everyone of them could be turned into a weapon and kill many people but you seem to forget them!
As Wot says, there will always be a threat of some sort. Going after the crew who for decades have not been a problem, is wasted time.
Disagree slightly with Wot on one point, it will get to the point where it will effect the livelyhood of aviation workers WORLDWIDE if it continues the way its going now.
Correct again on your last point, these measures are a kneejerk reaction to a real threat that we all should have been keeping an eye on for years. Those of us who have been in the business for a while know that this is just whitewash to make the public feel better and keep flying. Someday we will be able to stand up and tell the truth, and start working to do the right thing.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: here and there but mostly lgw
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr bernoulli,
I was confused as to why you didnt appreciate the need for mobile phones at work. Then it became clear. "twenty" years in the military" and working for "one of the worlds biggest airlines"That would explain your fragile grasp of the reality of work outside those two lofty spired institutions. Especially if they were the RAF and BA respectively. Both giving rise to Marie Antoinette syndrom. (re Lancet issue 210 2001, The pitfalls of grammar school, The raf, and institutional airlines on the Phsyce of self obsession. A paper by Dr I. AV. A. Chip)
In the real uncosseted world of avaition, mobiles are essential.
edited to make worse already poor spelling
I was confused as to why you didnt appreciate the need for mobile phones at work. Then it became clear. "twenty" years in the military" and working for "one of the worlds biggest airlines"That would explain your fragile grasp of the reality of work outside those two lofty spired institutions. Especially if they were the RAF and BA respectively. Both giving rise to Marie Antoinette syndrom. (re Lancet issue 210 2001, The pitfalls of grammar school, The raf, and institutional airlines on the Phsyce of self obsession. A paper by Dr I. AV. A. Chip)
In the real uncosseted world of avaition, mobiles are essential.
edited to make worse already poor spelling
Last edited by Farty Flaps; 20th Aug 2006 at 16:42.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: England
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBernoulli you have to be the first pilot I have come across that thinks the present security measures will prevent anyone from flying an aircraft into a building. They are utterly ridiculous and only serve to piss as all off and quite honestly I think they are a slur on every professional pilot’s integrity.
An example of how absurd they are is I heard an American pilot on the chat freq tell everyone how security had let his air marshal through with his gun but relieved him of his toothpaste!
No amount of security will prevent a sleeper or someone who’s had an argument with his wife partner etc from flying his/her aeroplane into a building or another aircraft. A well known freight company with a disgruntled employee on board nearly achieved it. It was only the tenacity and skill of the professional crew that saved the day.
It is about bloody time that governments and security especially the keystone cop’s variety started treating us with the respect we all deserve no matter what greed or believes.
An example of how absurd they are is I heard an American pilot on the chat freq tell everyone how security had let his air marshal through with his gun but relieved him of his toothpaste!
No amount of security will prevent a sleeper or someone who’s had an argument with his wife partner etc from flying his/her aeroplane into a building or another aircraft. A well known freight company with a disgruntled employee on board nearly achieved it. It was only the tenacity and skill of the professional crew that saved the day.
It is about bloody time that governments and security especially the keystone cop’s variety started treating us with the respect we all deserve no matter what greed or believes.
Last edited by Symbian; 20th Aug 2006 at 18:15.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is somewhat surprising that BAA regulations permit the carriage of Kirpans (ceremonial swords which according to Wikipedia can be up to 3 feet long) through the staff control posts and search points but not toothpaste and water. God help us!
Está servira para distraerle.
The Kirpan is an integral part of the dress ritual or khalsas of the Sikhs, a great and noble race of people.
They are required to carry a Kirpan as a reminder to fight for truth and justice. It is never used as a weapon or at least should not be so employed in the hands of a khalsa Sikh. Furthermore, this dagger is entirely ceremonial and its significance lies in the carriage of the item and not in its size. A small Kirpan worn around the neck will suffice for religious requirements, at least so I am led to believe by those I know from the Punjab. Furthermore; I rather fancy that a Sikh would take exception to being considered an Islamic extremist although in the past all has not been quite as good as gold at the Temple of Amritsar.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too have a small knife. It's attached to a religious device called a 'Leatherman'. It's significance is ceremonial and I haven't been allowed to carry it in my flight bag since 9/11. Nor am I a Muslim extremist.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the police and customs. These people are allowed to go though security channels without being challenged.
I think there is an equal chance of an SO19 officer being turned and killing people with his police issued weapon, and the pilot taking explosive tooth paste on to the aircraft to blow it up.
I think there is an equal chance of an SO19 officer being turned and killing people with his police issued weapon, and the pilot taking explosive tooth paste on to the aircraft to blow it up.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, yes, and here in Australia one is permitted to carry one of THESE as carry-on luggage:
Of great cultural significance, these Didgeridoos.... well, they are to the lease-holders of the duty free shops in the secure area, anyway.....
Then again, woe betide the CAPTAIN of an aircraft who attempts to take one of THESE through the security point:
It is nothing short of a total joke.
Of great cultural significance, these Didgeridoos.... well, they are to the lease-holders of the duty free shops in the secure area, anyway.....
Then again, woe betide the CAPTAIN of an aircraft who attempts to take one of THESE through the security point:
It is nothing short of a total joke.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ron and Edna
Why would you want to take an Aborigine on as carry on luggage??
Everyone else
I have tried experimenting with my sons chemistry set for the last two nights and i still cant get a tube of toothpaste to explode! I have tried Crest, Colgate, Macleans etc, but the stuff will not explode, no matter what i do to it. I cant set it on fire, i cant detonate it. Even more difficult have been my attempts to set fire to my bottle of water. Evian, Buxton Spring, Perrier, they are all the same. Once the bottle melts the fire seems to go out. Am i missing something? Anyone with any ideas greatly appreciated. My next move is to attach in turn, 4 pounds of PE to the toothpaste and water, with duct tape and see if that will make it explode. If it works i suggest with immediate effect that no passenger(or pilot for that matter!!!) is permitted to carry Plastic Explosives on board the aircraft if they are in possession of toothpaste or water.
Just another thought, maybe, just maybe all of the sleepers have been put in jobs in airport security. It might explain the incredible inconsistencies, and they are after all causing more havoc world-wide than the loss of an aircraft. It would be interesting to know which nationalities say you cant take your pen on board.
Why would you want to take an Aborigine on as carry on luggage??
Everyone else
I have tried experimenting with my sons chemistry set for the last two nights and i still cant get a tube of toothpaste to explode! I have tried Crest, Colgate, Macleans etc, but the stuff will not explode, no matter what i do to it. I cant set it on fire, i cant detonate it. Even more difficult have been my attempts to set fire to my bottle of water. Evian, Buxton Spring, Perrier, they are all the same. Once the bottle melts the fire seems to go out. Am i missing something?
Anyone with any ideas greatly appreciated. My next move is to attach in turn, 4 pounds of PE to the toothpaste and water, with duct tape and see if that will make it explode. If it works i suggest with immediate effect that no passenger(or pilot for that matter!!!) is permitted to carry Plastic Explosives on board the aircraft if they are in possession of toothpaste or water.Just another thought, maybe, just maybe all of the sleepers have been put in jobs in airport security. It might explain the incredible inconsistencies, and they are after all causing more havoc world-wide than the loss of an aircraft. It would be interesting to know which nationalities say you cant take your pen on board.
Last edited by Tigs2; 21st Aug 2006 at 02:21.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: LONDON
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naturally it would be fantastic (and even that is an understatement in the current circumstances) if the pilot unions could make the situation more tolerable for the people they supposedly represent, but can anyone tell me where the cabin crew stands in all this?
It can be easily said that the captain doesn't need his toothpaste to fly the a/c to the Houses of Parliament should he wish to do so, but the same does not apply to us trolley dollies. Is there anyone actually defending c/c rights?
Just a shy little enquery by someone who is p'd off because she can't have her daily probiotic yoghurt because BAA classifies it as a dangerous liquid...
It can be easily said that the captain doesn't need his toothpaste to fly the a/c to the Houses of Parliament should he wish to do so, but the same does not apply to us trolley dollies. Is there anyone actually defending c/c rights?
Just a shy little enquery by someone who is p'd off because she can't have her daily probiotic yoghurt because BAA classifies it as a dangerous liquid...
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Profiling
Sometime in the 90s (I think 1995 after the Oklahoma bombing) I was travelling from Buenos Aires to New York. I recall before I left the UK there were concerns at the time that heightened US security might impede or delay my travel. I turned up at the UA check-in and joined the queue, A man was talking to each passenger in turn. When he came to me he asked to see my passport and ticket, and he asked me a few questions about where I was going and why. Then he moved on to the guy behind me.
I guess that's profiling. If it was used 10 years ago in response to a percieved threat, then why not today?
I guess that's profiling. If it was used 10 years ago in response to a percieved threat, then why not today?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airside ID, passport, Identity Card. What will be the next 'must have' once the criminals have copied each of these?
and the 'sleeper' who was born in your society, who has no criminal record and who has therefore presumably got your 'low' risk assessment could therefore be fast-tracked through security I guess?
More red tape with the spending of billions of pounds of tax payers money on a fatally flawed security system is not what we need. The resources should be targetted where they will have most success, not on something like a National Identity Card which may be technically possible but beyond the ability of our present lords and masters to instigate without huge gaps and hence lack of security at vast cost.
PP
Then when they get their ID card - after a personal interview and a profile catagory then they could have a risk assessment stored on their ID card.
More red tape with the spending of billions of pounds of tax payers money on a fatally flawed security system is not what we need. The resources should be targetted where they will have most success, not on something like a National Identity Card which may be technically possible but beyond the ability of our present lords and masters to instigate without huge gaps and hence lack of security at vast cost.
PP
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Profiling has to come and it is not difficult and anyway Customs have used it for years. Anyone with an open mind, unafflicted by the deadening effect of political correctness and of average intelligence could walk along the line of the security queues and eliminate interest in a good 60% without much problem. Just practice on the next queue you see in an airport , railway station, Madam Tussauds,-or anywhere. With a little experience a further 20% could be added to the "go straight through " list and even then there would be plenty more of zero interest. Resources spent on 20% rather than 100% would have a much better chance of discovering anything that shouldnt be there, whatever form it comes in.
I think much of what is being discussed here stems from the failure of many current Western governments to acknowledge some basic facts:
In a 'free society', most individuals have the potential to cause damage and/or loss of life on quite a large scale. The fact that they generally don't do so is not a reflection on the level of policing/security they are subject to but on their state of wellbeing, mental health and empathy for their fellow men.
Any sufficiently open society is vulnerable to terrorist attacks, that's a given. Where the choice lies is in how that society responds to this challenge: by removing freedoms from all its citizens in a desperate endeavour to stay in control or by trying to understand why attacks are taking place and attempting to remove the cause itself. One leads to the creation of a 'Fourth Reich' or USSR MkII, the other, hopefully, to a more enlightened and safe world to live in.
Which do you feel more threatened by in the UK/USA: the risk of being killed by terrorist action or the 2am knock on the door from the security services? Statistically, which is more likely to happen to you these days? If you think I'm being flippant, remember Guantanamo Bay for the USA and the police in the UK wanting to keep suspects imprisoned for 90 days or more without trial or charge...
Sorry about the rant - possibly slightly off-topic but I needed to get that off my chest!
In a 'free society', most individuals have the potential to cause damage and/or loss of life on quite a large scale. The fact that they generally don't do so is not a reflection on the level of policing/security they are subject to but on their state of wellbeing, mental health and empathy for their fellow men.
Any sufficiently open society is vulnerable to terrorist attacks, that's a given. Where the choice lies is in how that society responds to this challenge: by removing freedoms from all its citizens in a desperate endeavour to stay in control or by trying to understand why attacks are taking place and attempting to remove the cause itself. One leads to the creation of a 'Fourth Reich' or USSR MkII, the other, hopefully, to a more enlightened and safe world to live in.
Which do you feel more threatened by in the UK/USA: the risk of being killed by terrorist action or the 2am knock on the door from the security services? Statistically, which is more likely to happen to you these days? If you think I'm being flippant, remember Guantanamo Bay for the USA and the police in the UK wanting to keep suspects imprisoned for 90 days or more without trial or charge...
Sorry about the rant - possibly slightly off-topic but I needed to get that off my chest!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tipping point
We have now reached a tipping point on the security issue, at one time any questioning of the workings of airport security would be dismissed and the person treated with utter contempt by the security authoritys (the BAA took three months to answer a letter detailing mis-conduct by security staff)
The latest list of banned items for flight crew are so restrictive that the press have "locked on" to the supidity, on sunday on a BBC radio show the chattering classes talked about the issue, when the likes of M Portillo start talking about aircrew security then it has hit a cord with the public.
What the industry has to do is keep this in the public eye, BALPA are doing there bit but you to can help when you are doing a PA to the PAX tell them that due to the stupid regulations the cabin crew dont look there best !.
This pressure is the only way that we will get things changed and free the security staff from the hunt for nail clippers and lipstick and let then spend more time in the search for explosives and detornators.
My issue is not with the front line security staff it is with the half witted idiots who issue the orders, it is clear that the management of the BAA has not the first idea of day to day airline opps and see's us as just the providors of customers for the shopping arcades that they run.
I we as the flying staff come a very poor third in the BAA managements eyes after the shopping profits and covering them selfs by banning things that we need to safely do the job to avoid even the remotest risk to being seen to have a "security breach"
The latest list of banned items for flight crew are so restrictive that the press have "locked on" to the supidity, on sunday on a BBC radio show the chattering classes talked about the issue, when the likes of M Portillo start talking about aircrew security then it has hit a cord with the public.
What the industry has to do is keep this in the public eye, BALPA are doing there bit but you to can help when you are doing a PA to the PAX tell them that due to the stupid regulations the cabin crew dont look there best !.
This pressure is the only way that we will get things changed and free the security staff from the hunt for nail clippers and lipstick and let then spend more time in the search for explosives and detornators.
My issue is not with the front line security staff it is with the half witted idiots who issue the orders, it is clear that the management of the BAA has not the first idea of day to day airline opps and see's us as just the providors of customers for the shopping arcades that they run.
I we as the flying staff come a very poor third in the BAA managements eyes after the shopping profits and covering them selfs by banning things that we need to safely do the job to avoid even the remotest risk to being seen to have a "security breach"
Last edited by A and C; 22nd Aug 2006 at 08:33.