Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

The "Crew Security" Thread (merged)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

The "Crew Security" Thread (merged)

Old 2nd May 2007, 06:31
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Assuming I'm a "naughty" person and wish to take my "dangerous" liquid through security .........

Anyone able to tell me how putting it in a resealable clear plastic bag makes it any safer???????
TFlyguy is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 07:19
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well done Girtbar, I suggest a new thread when it's done.

My funniest experience trying to carry a small bottle of liquid past security (as pax) was when I took a small spray bottle containing a hair oil. The muppet looked at it and remarked:

"This is not possible!"

I said: "It's been through before", to which he replied without thinking (cos that's not what they're paid to do):

"This is possible"
Superpilot is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 09:23
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 64
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The following is the text of a letter sent to the UK Times newspaper late yesterday, not by me; perhaps it will be used, perhaps not.



Sir,

There is a new, insidious threat to air travellers’ safety.

For most passengers,security screening is a terrible nuisance, but not a major problem.
The majority only endure it a few times a year. But aircrew are subjected to exactly the same process every time they go to work. Many experience it three or four times in a single day.

According to many confidential incident reports, at many UK airports the security staff, often quite low-grade, are increasingly aggressive, hostile and rude to aircrew, and “delight” in carrying out frequent full body searches, emptying bags, and generally making life difficult.
Aircrew now reach their aircraft seething with contained anger. This is dangerous enough, but the time the crew needs to settle down, and to check the aircraft and paperwork, including essential navigation notices, is also being badly eroded. It is important to understand that these reports analyse the errors that have already happened as a result of all this, and are not simply about the security staff and procedures which they describe and cite as a contributory cause.

It is an absurd regulation that requires an operating crew to be searched aggressively for the weapons needed to take control of an aircraft by foul means, when they are going to take control of it in any case five minutes later because that’s their job. The assertion that “everyone must be treated the same” is as ridiculous in its earnest stupidity as it always is, but is the only explanation advanced so far. There are many ways that the problem could be overcome without reducing aviation security standards, about which I have great experience and knowledge, by one jot.


The Civil Aviation Authority, and the Department of Transport, should not be allowed to continue down the traditional Civil Service route of masterly inaction until an accident happens and people are killed by the aviation security regulations rather than saved by them.
lotman1000 is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 11:47
  #64 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ici
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well the petition is still not live, but ill check again later this evening.
girtbar is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 17:58
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
cavortingcheetah's post made be think - are there any rules on frozen liquids?

I really do not know how those of you who have to work with this nonsense cope.
swordfling is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 19:55
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: scandinavia
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My two cents:

There will be an ease of the liquid rules when they are going through that 6 months review, simply because of the massive drop in tax free liquor sales. The whole plan was to get the sales up, but it failed. People don't know what is allowed and what is not, and don't bother to take the chance of losing their booze.
snuble is offline  
Old 2nd May 2007, 22:29
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SYD
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I heard a story a while ago where some Pakistanis desperate to come to the new motherland jumped the fence at Islamabad to climb up the landing gear bay as a B777 was getting ready for T/O.

If people that are stupid enough to think that they will survive an embarkment like this one, what is stoping Mr/Mrs terrorist to do the same thing but instead plant a magnetic explosive to the fuselage of the aircraft?

The best thing of all Mr/Mrs terrorist will not even have to die do get the message accross.

All these morons who invent these rules should be send to the gulags indefinately.

Last edited by Flying Spaniard; 2nd May 2007 at 22:40.
Flying Spaniard is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 01:18
  #68 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
Now that you're here - more BAA security nonsense

Interesting observation from Sir Michael Bishop (BMI) that there may indeed be a mathematical relationship between the number of security staff on duty at any one time, and the amount of time pax are asked to be at the airport (ie. shopping in a revenue rich environment) to clear the unacceptable security lines. Thank goodness BAA shopping and security staff rostering are completely decoupled activities.

More here;

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle1739175.ece
Two's in is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 08:53
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,645
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Two's in
Thank goodness BAA shopping and security staff rostering are completely decoupled activities.
Indeed they must be.

Security. Constant staff shortages, the ones who are there are often plonkers, complete jobsworth attitude, never any managers apparent, half or more the security stations usually closed, etc. Problems invariably blamed on the time it takes to get security clearance for staff.

Airside retail. Never any staff shortages, staff always pleasant and polite, no jobsworth attitudes, adequate number of managers on hand, shops never closed due to staff shortage. Seemingly no problem in getting security clearance for staff (which, as they are airside, is the same as for their security counterparts)
WHBM is online now  
Old 3rd May 2007, 09:04
  #70 (permalink)  
Bellwether&cloudbuster
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Times picks up the story.

Well well PPRUNE gets mentioned in The Times no less about this.....

http://travel.timesonline.co.uk/tol/...cle1738277.ece
Julian Hensey is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 09:44
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 64
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Security No liquids over a tiny volume, must be in container in stupid plastic bags if under that volume. ( How does that bag make a container safe when it is unsafe it not in the bag?)

Airside retail Any volume of liquids packed in any size of bottle, crated and taken airside via a cursory check by the same bottom-feeders who man the human security channels, no thorough check on contents (any check at all?) and then sold to compulsorily liquid-less passengers, aircrew and ground staff at extortionate prices.

Passengers and crew can then take these large, more or less unchecked containers on to the aircraft, as many as they can stagger on board with. So can all airside ground-staff with a reason for going into the cabin, ie cleaners, dispatchers, station staff etc etc.

All in the name of windfall profits for retailer's and airport owner's shareholders? How cosy, and how ineffective against terrorists.
lotman1000 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 09:58
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At last a use for all those shampoos and gels we've been nicking from the hotel for years, I would think at least 4 in the flight bag each and every time we go through security would get the message accross. Should always carry them in case of unscheduled night stop!!!!
facsimile is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 10:10
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hotel shampoo

I am sure that there are security people who would be only to happy delay both you and the rest of the crew while they turn your bag inside out looking for your tricky substance's (providing of course a. they see them b. that they can be bothered to join in the fun)
carousel is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 10:13
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LHR/Surrey
Age: 39
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
which, as they are airside, is the same as for their security counterparts
The criminal record check is the same, but there's a CTC check as well by Police / SO15 / MI5 for security staff which takes far longer
timelapse is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 10:16
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Wilmslow and North Yorks
Age: 53
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A friend of mine recently had a small bottle of liquid (shower gel or similar) confiscated by one of these anti-aircrew agents. When he asked why he wasn't allowed t take it through he was told:

"You can't take anything through that might enable you to take over the aircraft."

His reply: "I intend to take over the aircraft, i'm the ***king Captain"

The whole thing is beyond a joke now, there seems to be no consistency in the checks i go through every day. Virtually stripping the fillings out of my teeth to ensure i have no metal on my person, doesn't set the machine off one day but does the next! Sometimes it's shoes off, sometimes it isn't. Sometimes the security guy's are overbearing, jumped up, Hitler-style muppets and ............sometimes they're worse.
ComJam is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 10:27
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Guys we are not alone in knowing this is absurd. Watch and enjoy these 30 second videos:

Airport security 1
Airport security 2

We need to start writing to our MPs. This is not politics, it's just nonsense.

Moderators, PLEASE can we have our own Airport Security forum on PPruNe.
clearfinalsno1 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 11:08
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its gone on for long enough now, time these rules were relaxed.
J-Man is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 11:56
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
First clip - that's the message the DfT are refusing to accept.
Second clip - hilarious and just about sums up the warped thinking behind the current regulations.
MaxReheat is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 12:19
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: uk
Age: 47
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When I went through security at chrismas time at Manchester I had 3 medicine liquids with me which I put in the small plastic bag but was surprised as no-one wanted to check what they were and the doctors letter I had with me wasn't asked for either.

But on the other hand there were people going around saying that we had to declare our lippy and mascara etc otherwise that would be taken of us!

creamegg is offline  
Old 3rd May 2007, 12:55
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Security measures such as these are not designed to withstand scrutiny by sane, professional people (who can rip the logic behind them apart). They exist solely to make it appear to the general foolhardy public that the government is doing something about the threat and is only reacting to a definite (debatable) threat.

Airport Security Game: http://www.shockwave.com/gamelanding...tsecurity.jsp#

Last edited by Superpilot; 3rd May 2007 at 18:34.
Superpilot is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.