Airport Security (Merged) - Effects on Crew/Staff
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to the various opinions being represented in t - wondering whether there is any chance of a Poll on this - Mods? Would be interesting to see what the consensus is amongst us.
Should Pilots/Crew be subjected to the same security measures as passengers given the fact other personnel are not and have access to passengers/aircraft?
Should Pilots/Crew be subjected to the same security measures as passengers given the fact other personnel are not and have access to passengers/aircraft?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: tahiti
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how about going thru semi clad. best in front of the pax. since you have to take your shoes off why not just keep going down to your pants. or if that doesnt work why not have a rant, again in front of the pax. probably wont achieve much but might make humour of a farsical situation. might have to be careful with what you say - "why are you taking my toothpaste away when i have just ordered 100 tonnes of avtur to be put on to the plane", careful though, you might find the security manager listening so he will probably call the fuel farm and cancel your order as a precaution. thats how stupid it all is. dont give me the crp about passing stuff (sic) cos it aint a player. umm i hear the mutterings of "professionalism" being aired, well brothers and sisters if you are a professional you should be treated as such just like any other line of work. 4 days ago i was so incensed after coming thru security WE missed things on take off. i put it down to being in a seething bad mood due to this utter b0ll*x. anyone with any human factors training knows this situation is one of the most dangerous. so lets get it sorted now - not next week or in a few days but NOW. oh and the liberals who write on here trying to say its ok - your opinion - but i aint happy anymore and if you open your eyes you will see neither are the majority.
rant over for now
rant over for now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Up in the air
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BigGrecian
Due to the various opinions being represented in t - wondering whether there is any chance of a Poll on this - Mods? Would be interesting to see what the consensus is amongst us.
Should Pilots/Crew be subjected to the same security measures as passengers given the fact other personnel are not and have access to passengers/aircraft?
Should Pilots/Crew be subjected to the same security measures as passengers given the fact other personnel are not and have access to passengers/aircraft?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security - Humbug!
Well I’ve read some garbage in my time, Mr Bernoulli, but your understanding of our job and industry proves what a total lack of knowledge you hold about the current way a modern airline works. ‘No mobile telephones on the flight deck’, without which we would probably never get airborne half the time. What on earth do you think we do? Have you even contemplated what it takes to fly to the USA right now? What do you understand about the use of aircraft radio equipment while refuelling? Not a lot, obviously.
Frankly. I am thoroughly pissed off having to put up with the utter contempt shown by security personnel toward aircrew. I have been in this industry longer than most of them and I would like to ask why it is and who decides that I am a risk and the security guard isn’t. Personally, I think that the security guards have a greater opportunity to house a ‘sleeper’ than fully employed members of flight crew. At any time, a security guard who may be sympathetic to some warped cause is more likely to be in a position to compromise the safety of an aircraft by being collusion with others or simply planting a device in a passing case.
Profiling is the way forward, and let’s start with the pilots. I have already had to prove that I have been in continuous employment. I have had to supply references from every previous employer and personal references. I have had to have been assessed by the Disclosure Scotland people who have dragged through my background and all sorts. I have had to attend interviews with the airport authorities and at the US embassy in London to prove I am an honest sole. On the back of all this I get a security pass which frankly isn’t worth a cent. The other day I offered to give it back and just check in with the passengers instead.
At what point am I considered to be a responsible guy? I wonder, and in particular, why do I have to suffer the indignities of a bunch of twisted, paranoid, megalomaniac bunch of idiots most of whom have been recently dragged off the street with no, or little, previous history in this business, simply to swell the ranks of the security personnel who are blind to see that if they piss enough people off they will be out of a job as more and more people cease to put up with this paranoia.
After all that can anyone out there point at any terrorist act carried out by a paid and employed airline pilot? Given that the Egypt air crash was cause by a psychologically imbalance chap, he was not a terrorist and no airport scanner or body search that I know of can detect that sort of mental problem.
These security people have hi-jacked our industry and it's time to take it back!!They think that we are there because they are and not the other way around.
Frankly. I am thoroughly pissed off having to put up with the utter contempt shown by security personnel toward aircrew. I have been in this industry longer than most of them and I would like to ask why it is and who decides that I am a risk and the security guard isn’t. Personally, I think that the security guards have a greater opportunity to house a ‘sleeper’ than fully employed members of flight crew. At any time, a security guard who may be sympathetic to some warped cause is more likely to be in a position to compromise the safety of an aircraft by being collusion with others or simply planting a device in a passing case.
Profiling is the way forward, and let’s start with the pilots. I have already had to prove that I have been in continuous employment. I have had to supply references from every previous employer and personal references. I have had to have been assessed by the Disclosure Scotland people who have dragged through my background and all sorts. I have had to attend interviews with the airport authorities and at the US embassy in London to prove I am an honest sole. On the back of all this I get a security pass which frankly isn’t worth a cent. The other day I offered to give it back and just check in with the passengers instead.
At what point am I considered to be a responsible guy? I wonder, and in particular, why do I have to suffer the indignities of a bunch of twisted, paranoid, megalomaniac bunch of idiots most of whom have been recently dragged off the street with no, or little, previous history in this business, simply to swell the ranks of the security personnel who are blind to see that if they piss enough people off they will be out of a job as more and more people cease to put up with this paranoia.
After all that can anyone out there point at any terrorist act carried out by a paid and employed airline pilot? Given that the Egypt air crash was cause by a psychologically imbalance chap, he was not a terrorist and no airport scanner or body search that I know of can detect that sort of mental problem.
These security people have hi-jacked our industry and it's time to take it back!!They think that we are there because they are and not the other way around.
Last edited by On-MarkBob; 23rd Aug 2006 at 21:52.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: @work
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terrorists around the world can rejoice, a few scare notes stashed in the in-flight magzines and the snowball is bouncing down the hill. Could we ever provide them with a bigger present than this? They can watch us squirm as our civil rights are stripped from us, as people become more and more paranoid and stop flying. Business crumbling due to decreased pax loads and increased costs. The bad guys must be on rolling around on the floors laughing as we do their jobs for them.
Meanwhile I'm getting my toothpaste confiscated.
How about nail clippers, are they ok? Electric razor? How about the #€% crash axe, can I bring that?
This is bullcrap people, fresh smoking dung on a plate, and we're chowing down and asking for second servings.
Meanwhile I'm getting my toothpaste confiscated.
How about nail clippers, are they ok? Electric razor? How about the #€% crash axe, can I bring that?This is bullcrap people, fresh smoking dung on a plate, and we're chowing down and asking for second servings.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On-Mark Bob
Very well said
, it is about time people started saying what they think instead of trying not to upset people. I don't think any terrorists have been single white females, or retired, or middle aged. So let us go on with the business of protecting this country and let the pilots and airlines get on with their jobs without being pixxed off in the process.
Keep on flying.
Very well said
, it is about time people started saying what they think instead of trying not to upset people. I don't think any terrorists have been single white females, or retired, or middle aged. So let us go on with the business of protecting this country and let the pilots and airlines get on with their jobs without being pixxed off in the process.Keep on flying.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Up in the air
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The American internet aviation news forum AvWeb just picked this issue up.
BRITISH PILOTS LOSE PATIENCE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#193031)
Meanwhile, across the pond, airline officials and pilots are fed up with security measures and delays.
RyanAir CEO Michael O'Leary said last week that measures such as banning shampoo and lipstick in carry-on bags are "farcical, Keystone Cops-like and completely insane and ineffectual.... We are not in danger of dying at the hands of toiletries."
He said he would sue the government if security is not restored to normal levels within a week. His airline lost about 2 million during the latest security crisis. Pilots also have been banned from taking contact-lens solution into the cockpit,
"There is no logic at all in this," said Capt Mervyn Granshaw. Another pilot told the Sunday Herald it was ironic that his glasses were taken away for security reasons. "While my glasses were deemed potentially deadly dangerous items, I once again took my seat at the controls of 185,000 kilos of aeroplane, people and fuel and managed to restrain myself from taking the crash axe to all and sundry prior to rolling, inverted and diving, into the Channel," he said.
Another pilot said: "It's high time BALPA [the British pilot's union] and our representatives exposed these shameful rules for what they are -- some half-witted mandarins making up petty and useless rules to justify their existence, with equally inept and stupid people interpreting the rules."
BRITISH PILOTS LOSE PATIENCE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#193031)
Meanwhile, across the pond, airline officials and pilots are fed up with security measures and delays.
RyanAir CEO Michael O'Leary said last week that measures such as banning shampoo and lipstick in carry-on bags are "farcical, Keystone Cops-like and completely insane and ineffectual.... We are not in danger of dying at the hands of toiletries."
He said he would sue the government if security is not restored to normal levels within a week. His airline lost about 2 million during the latest security crisis. Pilots also have been banned from taking contact-lens solution into the cockpit,
"There is no logic at all in this," said Capt Mervyn Granshaw. Another pilot told the Sunday Herald it was ironic that his glasses were taken away for security reasons. "While my glasses were deemed potentially deadly dangerous items, I once again took my seat at the controls of 185,000 kilos of aeroplane, people and fuel and managed to restrain myself from taking the crash axe to all and sundry prior to rolling, inverted and diving, into the Channel," he said.
Another pilot said: "It's high time BALPA [the British pilot's union] and our representatives exposed these shameful rules for what they are -- some half-witted mandarins making up petty and useless rules to justify their existence, with equally inept and stupid people interpreting the rules."
On-MarkBob,
Some of you chaps are so busy fuming that I worry about your ability to continue your profession, in the immediate future, in a calm and professional manner.
I gave my opinion. I stand by it. This is a forum for such things, is it not? In MY job I never use a mobile phone at/in the aircraft. I say again, in MY job. If your job requires it, so be it. How did you manage before you had the phone? Perhaps your company needs to consider how its ops may come to a grinding near-halt if you don't have a mobile all the time. Perhaps that would then be the spur to get some of the management types on the back of whoever dreamed up the security 'rules'. If that is what you feel needs doing, then start the process.
I may not approve of what is going on but metaphorically 'stamping my foot' here and going on about hurt feelings will achieve nothing. The procedures are HERE, deal with them. Aren't we, as pilots, supposed to be able to maintain a semblance of professional fortitude in times of stress? Perhaps, with a bit of time and professional manoeuvring, we can get things evened out a bit.
Some of the postings here are sounding akin to the ravings of the very fanatics that are causing the security problem.
Some of you chaps are so busy fuming that I worry about your ability to continue your profession, in the immediate future, in a calm and professional manner.
I gave my opinion. I stand by it. This is a forum for such things, is it not? In MY job I never use a mobile phone at/in the aircraft. I say again, in MY job. If your job requires it, so be it. How did you manage before you had the phone? Perhaps your company needs to consider how its ops may come to a grinding near-halt if you don't have a mobile all the time. Perhaps that would then be the spur to get some of the management types on the back of whoever dreamed up the security 'rules'. If that is what you feel needs doing, then start the process.
I may not approve of what is going on but metaphorically 'stamping my foot' here and going on about hurt feelings will achieve nothing. The procedures are HERE, deal with them. Aren't we, as pilots, supposed to be able to maintain a semblance of professional fortitude in times of stress? Perhaps, with a bit of time and professional manoeuvring, we can get things evened out a bit.
Some of the postings here are sounding akin to the ravings of the very fanatics that are causing the security problem.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Devon
Age: 70
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your last para is way out of order. These lame brained so called security procedures are no such thing, they are merely hacking off thousands of passengers and highly stressing flight crew, and will not do an iota to prevent a genuine terrorist threat.
BALPA must call immediately for special measures for crew which do distinguish them from passengers, to introduce intelligent profiling and for knee jerk admins to stop doing the terrorists job for them.
BALPA must call immediately for special measures for crew which do distinguish them from passengers, to introduce intelligent profiling and for knee jerk admins to stop doing the terrorists job for them.
Which is precisely why I put the word 'rules' within inverted commas AND said that I didn't necessarily approve of all of them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nevertheless, I am still very firmly of the opinion that many posters here have led mollycoddled existences. A little adversity and the rants begin. Again, as I said above, use the energy wisely and go get the system changed. Write/talk to someone who can make a difference!
Nevertheless, I am still very firmly of the opinion that many posters here have led mollycoddled existences. A little adversity and the rants begin. Again, as I said above, use the energy wisely and go get the system changed. Write/talk to someone who can make a difference!
Last edited by MrBernoulli; 24th Aug 2006 at 17:55. Reason: Spelling!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 4milesbaby
I don't think any terrorists have been single white females
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Up in the air
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Curious Pax
How about Anne Murphy, the Irish woman whose boyfriend attempted to dupe her into boarding an El Al flight with semtex at Heathrow in 1986?
You are correct, we have ONE white person out of all of the terrorists, and the organization she was working with has now been disbanded. This is the reason why we search all of the passengers, but hopefully in the future will profile to concentrate on the suspicious ones just a bit more.
Still waiting to hear of one incident where a Western pilot has been turned or involved in a terrorist activity.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the cabin crew I was with today had an unopened tin of Baked Beans taken off her this morning whilst going through security. I was waiting in the queue for security and I was getting annoyed at just watching what was happening. What is more pathetic is that the security screener apparently said 'well my beans were taken off me at work so I can't let you through with yours'!!! Grow up!!!
Now I wonder if all the crew meals were searched in detail when they were brought onto the airfield? Since the tin foil on my cooked breakfast was intact then the answer is obviously no! Why do they trust a carton of milk in a catering lorry that may be loaded by someone who works in a facility in a landside location who does not need to be security screened yet we can't take food when we have got a airside pass? Logical isn't it? - not!
Now I wonder if all the crew meals were searched in detail when they were brought onto the airfield? Since the tin foil on my cooked breakfast was intact then the answer is obviously no! Why do they trust a carton of milk in a catering lorry that may be loaded by someone who works in a facility in a landside location who does not need to be security screened yet we can't take food when we have got a airside pass? Logical isn't it? - not!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. Bernoulli
Back to what I said. Mobile Phones are as much a part of our job now as the very aircraft we fly. A modern low cost carrier relies on them. The information we need to assimilate and dispatch is critical to smooth operations. Low cost airlines by their very nature do not subscribe to a large workforce of 'gofers'. The operation is trimmed to a minimum and we run it that way by the use of mobile phones, all over the world. Communication is everything and the passengers benifit form them by way of low airfares, small infrastructure and rapid response to problems. That is why they are successful. Indeed Mr. Bernoullli you hit the nail on the head! The crap that we have to endure is detrimental to safe operations by getting us irate, we learnt that way back when the Trident crashed at Stains. Shame the security people don't have to learn about it as well!!
The day I got hacked off was when one of my crew was reduced to tears by one of those oafs, in front of a whole buch of passengers, totally out of order in my opinion, what kind of example does that give to the passengers who may have depend on the crew for their very lives? The problem,... she had a spare pair of contact lenses,... like as if there was enough chemical them to cause much more than a single fart!
Taking our shoes off, What for? I don't have to have a knife or a bomb, I could board the aircraft stark naked and carrying not a bean, but since I am flying the dam thing and if my mind or inclination was as lunatic as those in security, I could wipe out the aircraft, all on board and anyone in the way within the blink of an eye!! It is not us pilots who have the problem it's the security that don't have the brains or common sence to realise just what stupidity this whole thing is.
Believe in the system, I've got my pass now let it mean something!!
Bob.
Back to what I said. Mobile Phones are as much a part of our job now as the very aircraft we fly. A modern low cost carrier relies on them. The information we need to assimilate and dispatch is critical to smooth operations. Low cost airlines by their very nature do not subscribe to a large workforce of 'gofers'. The operation is trimmed to a minimum and we run it that way by the use of mobile phones, all over the world. Communication is everything and the passengers benifit form them by way of low airfares, small infrastructure and rapid response to problems. That is why they are successful. Indeed Mr. Bernoullli you hit the nail on the head! The crap that we have to endure is detrimental to safe operations by getting us irate, we learnt that way back when the Trident crashed at Stains. Shame the security people don't have to learn about it as well!!
The day I got hacked off was when one of my crew was reduced to tears by one of those oafs, in front of a whole buch of passengers, totally out of order in my opinion, what kind of example does that give to the passengers who may have depend on the crew for their very lives? The problem,... she had a spare pair of contact lenses,... like as if there was enough chemical them to cause much more than a single fart!
Taking our shoes off, What for? I don't have to have a knife or a bomb, I could board the aircraft stark naked and carrying not a bean, but since I am flying the dam thing and if my mind or inclination was as lunatic as those in security, I could wipe out the aircraft, all on board and anyone in the way within the blink of an eye!! It is not us pilots who have the problem it's the security that don't have the brains or common sence to realise just what stupidity this whole thing is.
Believe in the system, I've got my pass now let it mean something!!
Bob.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to take my shoes off today before flying ex MAN. No one at the "security" checkpoint could tell my why I had to do this. Just following orders from the DfT no doubt. Anyone know the name of the biggest cheese down there as I'd like to ask him the same question? What's the betting that the supine response will point in the direction of Dubya's goons in the TSA.
By the way, ref mobile phones: Where's your home planet Mr Bernoulli?
By the way, ref mobile phones: Where's your home planet Mr Bernoulli?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: home
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some good points here, tis the same for the military as well. Mind you when I walk through security to the jet as a solo pilot (on the odd occasion we are at a civvy field) dressed in smelly green zoom bag. I still get the full monti from security, now you can't shoot the messenger for doing their job, but you gotta wonder about the who is making the rules. Now I don't have a lot of room for toothpaste but need my mobile as there are woman out there that need calling you know, o and the ops room maybe. Tis a tricky one really but we gotta trust some (well vetted) people as some stage or else these scroats have won, what next sky marshals in the cockpit?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by inawordavortex
.....what next sky marshals in the cockpit?
This sort of inane risk management approach is being applied to things like crews' contact lenses and lunches. The reduction in risk is probably similarly insignificant. Is it really worth the stress, tension, anger, effort? Mr Bernoulli - you are right about one thing - from all this there would be a statistical INCREASE in people making errors as a result of the daily stress and tension. So, we end up having a 0.00001 % reduction in the chance of dying by terrorism offset by a 0.00002 % increase in the chance of dying due to cockpit error? Great.
The resources/efforts would be far better focused on areas where you could make a significant impact on the chance of a terrorism event. Areas such as PROFILING.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
Originally Posted by chandlers dad
Another person caught by using profiling! At this time the country was under an almost constant attack from various organizations in Northern Ireland. You can bet that the security people at the airport were looking very closely at anyone with a passport or identification from this area and caught her before she was able to get on the gate.
You are correct, we have ONE white person out of all of the terrorists, and the organization she was working with has now been disbanded. This is the reason why we search all of the passengers, but hopefully in the future will profile to concentrate on the suspicious ones just a bit more.
You are correct, we have ONE white person out of all of the terrorists, and the organization she was working with has now been disbanded. This is the reason why we search all of the passengers, but hopefully in the future will profile to concentrate on the suspicious ones just a bit more.
And ISTR that she was only stopped at the gate by the extra LY security, where I believe they search everything to a degree that most passengers can only dream - nay, nightmare - about. Caught by profiling? I'd be interested to know if you have any hard evidence of that, or whether you've jumped to that conclusion just because she was Irish.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its ridiculous that flight & cabin crew are subject to the same restrictions on the carriage of liquids & gels as passengers - what is the point of having an ID?!
I think any operating crew member could do a damn sight more damage with the crash axe & BCF than with the amount of explosive that could be contained in a toothpaste tube. I'd love to meet the muppets who dream up these regulations.
I think any operating crew member could do a damn sight more damage with the crash axe & BCF than with the amount of explosive that could be contained in a toothpaste tube. I'd love to meet the muppets who dream up these regulations.