Frustrated (?) pilots and security screening
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last week , I asked a UK security guard at PIK how many bad things had ever been found in shoes, and his response was "None, it's ridiculous, isn't it?".
Stupid business, I don't think that the authorities review existing procedures, just devise new ones. No feedback system seems to exist, either from the guards or their potential terrorist targets.
Saw one at MAN hassling an old lady who must have been over 70, yesterday. Saw the same thing happen at GLA last year. I, for one, have no respect for these people, despite the fact that the stupid behaviour comes from a relatively small number of them. And for the people that invent the wrong and non-discriminatory rules, I wish them many sleepless nights. (Mild, that one)
Stupid business, I don't think that the authorities review existing procedures, just devise new ones. No feedback system seems to exist, either from the guards or their potential terrorist targets.
Saw one at MAN hassling an old lady who must have been over 70, yesterday. Saw the same thing happen at GLA last year. I, for one, have no respect for these people, despite the fact that the stupid behaviour comes from a relatively small number of them. And for the people that invent the wrong and non-discriminatory rules, I wish them many sleepless nights. (Mild, that one)
Terrorists rarely work alone. Once airside, a crew member could pass contentious material to another crew, a passenger or a cleaner (you get my drift) and such material could be used days-weeks-months later. Just needs planning, something terrorists aren't short of.
.
.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Flightpath BHD
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is my maiden post, so bear with me. Seeing the flight crew undergo the same srutony might put some of us pax at ease, personally I think it's a bit over the top. There seems to be a variation in degree of tightness at airports, including the level that the metal detectors are set at. I'm a frequent pax, and allways travel hand luggage only, my tackle includes an iron (a normal size job), sometimes they open my bag when they see it's bulk on the screen, but then give me the all clear when they see what it is. A couple of weeks ago at KTW the security fellow called over a military type guy, who obvoiusly had the final say, which was "it's too heavy, you could hit someone over the head with it", I informed him that the said iron had been through KTW before and other Polish airports without any problems. He thought it over and allowed me to carry my "weapon" onboard, but in future I'd have to check it in. If you wanted something heavy to hit somebody with all you have to do is buy a bottle of malabou in the airside shop!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EGSS
Age: 62
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always wear clean socks, complete with the day of the week on the side.
So a cursory check is neither embarassing or demeaning to me.
It usually starts a conversation as to whether I know what day it is (the days are brightly coloured).
This gives me an opportunity to politely converse or give a contemptuous look at the commentee.
With power comes responsibility, we must use it wisely.
So a cursory check is neither embarassing or demeaning to me.
It usually starts a conversation as to whether I know what day it is (the days are brightly coloured).
This gives me an opportunity to politely converse or give a contemptuous look at the commentee.
With power comes responsibility, we must use it wisely.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps those who come up with imaginative (a) (b) or (c) scenarios , could instead provide just one example, of where security have stopped a cockpit crew member of doing any of the things they suggest, or even an example of anyone actually having done what they suggest.
Obviously this flight wasn't transporting Pax but it serves to illustrate that these sort of incidents can happen. I don't remember all the details but the crew did a fantastic job in recovering the aircraft depsite sustaining awful injuries.
In uniform they never ask me to take my shoes off.
And they are Rockports, which have no metal.
Incidentally, I heard a rumor that a pilot keeps a ceramic tool which can not be detected in his/her flightbag.
Flash 8:
US authorities made the front page news two days ago when they discovered that foreign outsourced maintenance could allow a security threat to take place.
Years ago after the Valuejet (now Airtran) engine lost a turbine blade which went through the aft cabin, causing a flight attendant serious pain
, it was revealed that the engines had been overhauled in Turkey.
And they are Rockports, which have no metal.
Incidentally, I heard a rumor that a pilot keeps a ceramic tool which can not be detected in his/her flightbag.
Flash 8:
US authorities made the front page news two days ago when they discovered that foreign outsourced maintenance could allow a security threat to take place.
Years ago after the Valuejet (now Airtran) engine lost a turbine blade which went through the aft cabin, causing a flight attendant serious pain
, it was revealed that the engines had been overhauled in Turkey.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It wasn't meant to be a competition Evilbob!
I suggest we then remove the fire-axe(s), fire extinguishers, oxygen bottles, knives and forks from the galley, coffee pots, hot cups, cabin baggage, seat belts, shoe laces and anything else that could possibly be used to inflict damage or injury. You want my pen too?
I suggest we then remove the fire-axe(s), fire extinguishers, oxygen bottles, knives and forks from the galley, coffee pots, hot cups, cabin baggage, seat belts, shoe laces and anything else that could possibly be used to inflict damage or injury. You want my pen too?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clarence Oveur
Thats because you are not anything special...You are just an employee going to work and nothing more.
On an average day I go through the security search procedure 9 times. The record so far is 19.
The situation is such that on everyone of those occasions I could circumvent the checks. I am trusted to go through the checks whenever entering the RZ.
Yes they are inconvenient, yes, they are of dubious validity. They are however the rules we all have to work under. The rest of us do it without moaning constantly. Lobby your MP's. Only the Government can change this situation. Until then try and face it like a man....
It didn't take long for the 'non-aircrew-chip-on-their-shoulder' crowd to chip in with their 'don't-think-you-are-anything-special' driven arguments.
On an average day I go through the security search procedure 9 times. The record so far is 19.
The situation is such that on everyone of those occasions I could circumvent the checks. I am trusted to go through the checks whenever entering the RZ.
Yes they are inconvenient, yes, they are of dubious validity. They are however the rules we all have to work under. The rest of us do it without moaning constantly. Lobby your MP's. Only the Government can change this situation. Until then try and face it like a man....
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We get searched as TRANSEC believe there to be sleepers amongst our community. If you don't grumble and moan about it then it is not a real bother. If you get hot under the collar everyday then you need to chill out and learn to accept it. It is not an ideal solution but until them up stairs change there ideas then it's here to stay. Needless to say the minions at BAA searching you have no power/influence on changing this policy.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sunny South
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Double standards
I do believe that all airside personnel should be subject to the same level of searches.
However, the way the serches are conducted seems to be a bone of contention.
For example, on travelling throught the security point a colleague was following a workman who was waved through whilst carrying a 12" diamond blade cutting machine. My colleague, who has worked at the airport for a number of years, was then stopped and told to remove the metal fork from his bag which was duly confiscated.
God forbid if you try to bring a yogurt through!!!!
However, the way the serches are conducted seems to be a bone of contention.
For example, on travelling throught the security point a colleague was following a workman who was waved through whilst carrying a 12" diamond blade cutting machine. My colleague, who has worked at the airport for a number of years, was then stopped and told to remove the metal fork from his bag which was duly confiscated.
God forbid if you try to bring a yogurt through!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What no prizes? 
I don't deny that any of the above could be used as an offensive weapon. Nor did I suggest that security checks were right or wrong.
However:
Why assume that the guy queing infront of you in his nicely pressed uniform is actually a pilot? Why assume that the individual is actually attempting to get on the flight deck? Maybe all he/she needs to do is get airside unhindered. That would be really easy if all you had to do was impersonate a pilot who isn't subjected to the same scrutiny as the SLF. The name Frank Abagnale ring any bells? He convinced people for years using a uniform and forged documents.
I suggest we then remove the fire-axe(s), fire extinguishers, oxygen bottles, knives and forks from the galley, coffee pots, hot cups, cabin baggage, seat belts, shoe laces and anything else that could possibly be used to inflict damage or injury. You want my pen too?
However:
Why assume that the guy queing infront of you in his nicely pressed uniform is actually a pilot? Why assume that the individual is actually attempting to get on the flight deck? Maybe all he/she needs to do is get airside unhindered. That would be really easy if all you had to do was impersonate a pilot who isn't subjected to the same scrutiny as the SLF. The name Frank Abagnale ring any bells? He convinced people for years using a uniform and forged documents.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maastricht
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that these "security" personnel don't seem to have (or are allowed to use it) any common sense. Two examples as SLF:
1) Having bought a Sunday Times, I had the audacity to try to go through the intial security check at LHR T1 with the afforementioned paper in a carrier bag and my normal hand baggage. Of course I was stopped because this was TWO items of hand baggage. However, if I gave in the carrier bag and just held my newspaper in my hand this would be allowed. So what should have been a (relatively) simple pass through security, became a real struggle and inevitably I held up the queue because it was tricky.
2) I go through the routine every time I pass though security of having to put my laptop bag (containing the laptop), into my rollerboard to comply with the ONE item if hand baggage rule, and then when I get to the X-ray machine, instead of it being a simple procedure of extracting the laptop from the laptop case, I have to first go back into the rollerboard, and therefore hold up the queue again.
It's absolutely ludicrous. Isn't the ONE hand baggage rule supposed to speed up security?
1) Having bought a Sunday Times, I had the audacity to try to go through the intial security check at LHR T1 with the afforementioned paper in a carrier bag and my normal hand baggage. Of course I was stopped because this was TWO items of hand baggage. However, if I gave in the carrier bag and just held my newspaper in my hand this would be allowed. So what should have been a (relatively) simple pass through security, became a real struggle and inevitably I held up the queue because it was tricky.
2) I go through the routine every time I pass though security of having to put my laptop bag (containing the laptop), into my rollerboard to comply with the ONE item if hand baggage rule, and then when I get to the X-ray machine, instead of it being a simple procedure of extracting the laptop from the laptop case, I have to first go back into the rollerboard, and therefore hold up the queue again.
It's absolutely ludicrous. Isn't the ONE hand baggage rule supposed to speed up security?
....and of course, how do we know that the Pilots family are not being held to enforce his co-operation?????
Or the policemans family....
Whats good for us, ought to be good for them
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the OP - is an airline captain's position and dignity really so insecure that they can genuinely expect their gravitas and authority over their crew to be materially diminished by the denigration of being seen shoeless?
There is no security when it applies to the pilots- it's all a total waste of time. They can remove my nail clippers- when I get on the aeroplane I have a steel crash-axe/crowbar on the flight deck. In my hands I have anything up to 240 tons of aeroplane holding anything up to 150 tons of kerosene. Exactly why do I need to go through security again? So can we establish that any security applied to pilots is largely a waste of time? For show only?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rainboe and Ladusvala - no, security applied to pilots isn't a waste of time.
As you'll recall, in 1986 a pregnant woman flying out from Heathrow to Tel Aviv was found carrying a gift-wrapped bomb. It had been given to her by her Palestinian "boyfriend" who told her it was a Christmas present. It was found by El-Al security staff during a routine baggage-search.
So there are two levels of potential flight deck problems - (i) those intended by the crew themselves, which may be hard to prevent but which can be mitigated (just because you have the fire axe and the 240 tonne airliner, there's no need to let you care a dagger too!) and (ii) the shoe-bomb swap -
Christmas present bomb theory and its analogues, where your position may be taken advantage of by a third party, and security is there to stop this.
As for the TSA at JFK, I've experienced their full treatment as well and it isn't fun - indeed it goes some way towards being a public humiliation. It's still nothing, however, to the treatment it's possible to receive at TLV (the Israelis are more courteous than the US TSA but it's not a fun experience at all!)
As you'll recall, in 1986 a pregnant woman flying out from Heathrow to Tel Aviv was found carrying a gift-wrapped bomb. It had been given to her by her Palestinian "boyfriend" who told her it was a Christmas present. It was found by El-Al security staff during a routine baggage-search.
So there are two levels of potential flight deck problems - (i) those intended by the crew themselves, which may be hard to prevent but which can be mitigated (just because you have the fire axe and the 240 tonne airliner, there's no need to let you care a dagger too!) and (ii) the shoe-bomb swap -
Christmas present bomb theory and its analogues, where your position may be taken advantage of by a third party, and security is there to stop this.
As for the TSA at JFK, I've experienced their full treatment as well and it isn't fun - indeed it goes some way towards being a public humiliation. It's still nothing, however, to the treatment it's possible to receive at TLV (the Israelis are more courteous than the US TSA but it's not a fun experience at all!)
Last edited by J-Class; 18th Oct 2007 at 22:45. Reason: edited for grammar
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nonsense! Having had my nail clipper and toothpaste tube confiscated, I get on board and pick up my crash-axe! Where is the sense in that? Is there any need to stop me having a 'shoe bomb swap' when I have the very fate of the aircraft in my own hands anyway? there is no sense in it. Any security expended on the pilots is security wasted, and it would be better spent targeting those more likely to be terrorists- the passengers! The only possible pilot 'suiciders' used no weapons or devices- they used their bare hands. No security (as in today's idea of 'security') would have succeeded in stopping them. Confiscating keys, scissors, nail files, tins of shaving foam, toothpaste, yoghurt, bottles of water, crew meals- all a complete waste of time. But it gives a lot of people a job and a nice self-perpetuating career.