Airport Security (Merged) - Effects on Crew/Staff

[Globaliser]

Thanks for that. Although it does now leave me completely confused as to whether she was detected because she was known, or because she was profiled, or because she couldn't answer any questions straight.

[Danny]

Globaliser, that's just it... profiling is a combination of all three. A proper security agency would have access to the proper intelligence sources to keep them up to date with known attempts or individuals and their properly trained profilers would be able to ask the right questions based on their observations and build on that from the answers given.

In the case above, the girl was unwittingly carrying a bomb given to her by her terrorist boyfriend. He wasn't really her boyfriend but was duped by Nizar Hindawi who was a Syrian agent who saw an opportunity to befriend a naive and vulnerable young woman. This was a classic operation by the Syrians to blow up an El Al plane. Nizar Hindawi wasn't going to be on the plane himself, obviously, and it was through the classic profiling (questioning and observing) that El Al security uncovered this plot at the last minute.

As she was questioned by El Al security (profiler) it became increasingly obvious that she needed further investigation. Who purchased her ticket and how? Why wasn't the person who purchased her ticket travelling with her? What was her boyfriends name and where did he live? Who would be meeting her in Tel Aviv and where would she be staying? So on and so forth and as it became increasingly clear that it did not all add up the thorough search revealed the bomb hidden in the lining of the suitcase.

Now, compare that with the hired security person on little more than minimum wage who is employed to check your passport and ticket before you check in for most long haul flights these days. I know for a fact that they are unable to spot a ticket with a different surname than the one in the passport. Something that basic shows how pathetic the current system is. I had to point out to the security person that the name had been changed after marriage and that the change was actually noted on a different page in the passport!

[A and C]

Just like Judge 11 I would like to know when BALPA plans to have a meeting with the DfT "security department".

The DfT clearly has not a clue as to what is going on at the coalface and they should see this meeting with BALPA as an opportuity to improve security, they could start by having the less focus on the aircrew and using the staff at other locations.

It is in my interest to have 100% security but taking the pilots toothpaste and shower gel is not a good use of security staff manpower.

[FlapsOne]

I'm sure Balpa will now have this meeting just as soon as DfT agree to it. I don't think Balpa or anyone else actually has power to dictate when such a meeting would take place.

The main thrust must be that it takes place as soon as possible.

Personally I am totally fed up with my professional and security status being trashed on a daily basis whilst hackney cab drivers are given freedom to drive and park anywhere they like.

Something has got to change, and the time is about right. We have all put up with this cr@p for far too long!

[Man Flex]

There is always one individual who is responsible for making policy. In this case whether it is Mr Reid or someone at the DoT/BAA can we please have his name so we can ALL write to him and tell him what an a**hole he is!!!

[ShotOne]

As you say, Danny, classic profiling. Regrettably there is zero chance of anything like that taking place in a UK airport as the staff will be far too busy x raying the Captain's shoes and confiscating his pen.

Best of luck BALPA in trying top get this summit off the ground. We need to support them -can those who have posted here write to their MP's.

...and, never thought I'd say this but well done O'Leary! Why is he the only airline boss fighting his corner If lipstick or pens are really so lethal how come you can carry 10,000 of them on a bus or train?

[old,not bold]

Originally Posted by Ignition Override

There is no doubt that Israel's El Al airlines has never suffered a hijacking.

Nor have hundreds of other airlines in the world, so that doesn't prove much, does it?

Remember the story about the man who spread elephant powder in his garden in Clapham? Never had any elephants trampling around since then, so that proved the powder worked.

I have been "profiled" many times by El Al on the way to Tel Aviv, and I can vouch for the absurdity of the process as practised by El Al. An aggressive youth asks stupid questions and never, ever realises that the answers are a wind-up.

Profiling might be a useful weapon against airborne attacks. But can we please stop thinking that the Israelis do things well? They don't.

[Bearcat]

agree with a lot of points.....me thinks lhr security enjoy purposely going thru the capts bags....my brief case was opened and pages taken out of folders the other day, tablets questioned in front of ccm's....hand cream snatched off me...yet they say well put it in your case which is (going in the hold) and we are quits....i was seething.....my body language screamed W@NKERS at them...this is no way to go to work.

Its a joke.....what are crew going to do....shake the colgate and set a bomb off? What security should do though is take away the side stick and control column and every one is safe.....

joke....joke....joke.....PATHETIC.

I hate O'Leary and what he stands for but he is right....very right

[Chimbu chuckles]

O'leary has the sh1ts because security is forcing him to fill his holds, and slow his turn arounds down/employ people to actually put baggage in the hold, while at the same time he cannot charge passengers for it.

That being said at least he is hilighting the absurdity of current security measures so that is not all bad.

If there is one thing that should unite all aircrew and threaten industrial action this is it...obscene waste of resources that achieves precisely nothing...nothing positive anyway.

[Pilot Pete]

My F/O had is Lypsil confiscated the other day. I pointed out to the security staff how pleased I was that he now wouldn't be able to use it against me.....we both saw the funny side.

PP

[Mick Stability]

If there’s one thing that this problem is, it’s that it’s worldwide. We need to achieve different treatment for pilots that recognises our unique position as front line guardians of safety and not convenient objects of ridicule and humiliation, or subject to the whimsical interpretation of rules by any and every security official.

We could start by raising the profile of our profession in the press and media.

What about an international day of action where we all demonstrate? Marches in London, NY, Brussels etc all coordinated to tell the World that we’re fed up? Surely at least it would send that message that we’re not going to bend over and take it without a fight.

[Bangkokeasy]

Change is only going to be achieved, when the basic approach taken to security at airports itself is changed. At the moment, security as undertaken by BAA (or any other company for that matter), is done on the basis of a trade off between cost and risk. You may say that this will always be the case, whether this is in the public sector, or private, which is true. However, the clue is the nature of the risk and how it is perceived. In the private sector, the risk is defined by the threat not to lives, but to the company's position, should security fail. If in the public sector, the risk is, again, not to lives, but to the government's election prospects, should security fail. Therefore, there will always be a cost vs risk argument, but I would much rather see the public sector option, where the millions of inconvenienced people, pilots, airport workers, etc, even SLF, are able to vote the people responsible out of office, rather than the current situation.

[winkle]

got to run the gauntlet at MAN not been thru there since the "troubles" any tips on how to get thru a very minty toothpaste and some very powerful deodarant. its only a night stop.

[rudolf]

Latest at MAN is no food containing gravy, sauce, beans, mushy peas etc. allowed through the crew channel. Damn, I'll have to leave my exploding beans at home in future! This is getting ridiculous, wonder if it is from the DfT or just Manchester making it up as usual!

[Stall Horn]

Originally Posted by rudolf

Latest at MAN is no food containing gravy, sauce, beans, mushy peas etc. allowed through the crew channel. Damn, I'll have to leave my exploding beans at home in future! This is getting ridiculous, wonder if it is from the DfT or just Manchester making it up as usual!

In response to a letter I sent to BALPA a little while ago, (thread here Msg 406), Capt Mervyn Grimshaw (BALPA Chairman) was kind enough to make a personal resonse to me.

In it, he concluded:

Originally Posted by BALPA

Now that we are in possession of further information, although it remains the case that very little has sufficient detail be meaningful (date, time airport, RZ entry place, names etc), we have raised further concerns. If these are not addressed of course we demand to discuss this with the Secretary of State.

On this basis, I would urge you all to make reports of specific incidents like the above from "Rudolf", directly to BALPA - including sufficient detail to make the report meaningful:

I would suggest a point of contact may be as follows?

Carolyn Evans
Head, Flight Safety Department
The British Air Line Pilots Association
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
E-mail: [email protected]
BALPA Legal Protection for members
Emergency Helpline: [phone] Legal Advice Line: [phone]
http://www.balpa.org/

[rudolf]

I will grab a copy of the memo from Manchester Security and forward it to BALPA tomorrow.

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by Danny

Globaliser, that's just it... profiling is a combination of all three. A proper security agency would have access to the proper intelligence sources to keep them up to date with known attempts or individuals and their properly trained profilers would be able to ask the right questions based on their observations and build on that from the answers given.

Without descending into semantic arguments about how one would describe the three elements of the approach, I hope then that this type of approach can be distinguished - both in debate and in practice - from the concept of profiling which too many people seem to be baying for. The incident with the NW aircraft at AMS seems to provide a recent example of the latter.

[xetroV]

I am absolutely convinced that the current security fiasco is negatively affecting the "S" and "E" in "IMSAFE" (the well-known fit-for-flight checklist: Illness, Medication, Stress, Alchohol, Fatigue, Emotion). Therefore I wholeheartedly agree with Mick:

Originally Posted by Mick Stability

If there’s one thing that this problem is, it’s that it’s worldwide. We need to achieve different treatment for pilots that recognises our unique position as front line guardians of safety and not convenient objects of ridicule and humiliation, or subject to the whimsical interpretation of rules by any and every security official.

We could start by raising the profile of our profession in the press and media.

What about an international day of action where we all demonstrate? Marches in London, NY, Brussels etc all coordinated to tell the World that we’re fed up? Surely at least it would send that message that we’re not going to bend over and take it without a fight.

We need to convey this message to the rulemakers, and we need to show the stupidity of it all. Once upon a time, safety was supposed to be paramount; I'd like to think it still is.

[Nasi Lemak]

Security inconsistencies

Operated through LHR twice recently. First time, we experienced the full no hand baggage, cabin crew lippie to be in checked bags etc. A week later things were a bit calmer- nav bag and mobile phone allowed on board.

Reading the local press, there seemed to be some major inconsistencies between UK airports. While Heathrow was banning lip gloss, Birmingham had no problem with lippie of any kind, but were not allowing gel bras, on pilots or pax. (It was a female pilot who complained - just thought I'd make that clear).

So - my questions are - how did the Birmingham security staff decide who was wearing a gel bra - what did they do about it if they found one, and how do I apply for a job .....no, sorry, delete that last part

But seriously - if anyone had plans to attack an aircraft, all they had to do was read the press to establish which airport was looking for which substance. Why the inconsistencies??? And who came up with the idea of gel bras being a threat?????

[highcirrus]

I sent the following letter to a UK national newspaper a day or so ago. So far no notification of publication. Perhaps if we all sent similar ones plus copies to local MP's, the word might filter through. The "certain UK airport" was, of course, Manchester, where they do indeed seem to make it up as they go along!

Sir

Present day life is certainly full of irony. I very recently commanded an international flight from a certain UK airport to a destination in Southeast Asia and as the now standard prelude to gaining airside and the aircraft, in preparation for flight, ran the gamut of screening by employees of the contract security company currently engaged by the particular airport.

In line with phlegmatic and what looked like long resigned local flight crews of other airlines, I trooped sans belt and shoes through the metal detector in neat formation with my single piece of baggage during its journey through its own metal/explosives detector.

Inevitably, the aerosol canister of shaving foam, the tube of toothpaste and the small bottle of prescription eye drops stowed in the wash-bag that accompanies me on my world-wide travels became evident on the machine’s screen and a well oiled procedure then swung into effect whereby I was deprived of the items by a polite but firm operative who explained that he was just following orders when queried as to how exactly such a deprivation would contribute to the overall security of the flight shortly to be taken by 300 passengers in a multi-million dollar aircraft, the overall safety of which I was directly responsible for.

The exchange saw my bag, replete with banned items, consigned to the aircraft hold rather than accompanying me to the flight deck.

The ironies underlying this by now commonplace tale are that such “nonsensical” (cf. Michael O’Leary, CEO Ryanair) bureaucratic and pointless gestures, on the part of authority, in the name of “security” now seem only to be taken to such absurd lengths in UK and USA – the two nations in the front line of “the war on terror” - and which conclusion results from a work pattern that takes me into contact with the highly professional airport security systems of many other countries that do not see the need for the idiocy described.

Similarly, in common with thousands of industry colleagues, my own background (40 years professional military and heavy-jet air transport flying) has been vetted over the decades by regulatory authorities as part of the professional licencing system and by companies as part of the employment process and both of which are attested to by the production to lawful authority of a professional pilot licence and the now sophisticated company ID card. Ironically, it is doubtful that our watchers and vettors have such attested background.

Of final irony, of course, is that my polite but firm and no doubt temporarily employed security adjudicator, of shaven head and full beard countenance, was from the very UK multicultural ethnic community, an extremist minority of which, has caused the past, current and no doubt future terror furors in the industry. Plus ça change!