Frustrated (?) pilots and security screening
Plastic PPRuNer
"My Encounter with the TSA"
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I carry a crew badge, which means that I am deemed safe enough to be allowed to enter the most secure area of an airliner, whether I wear a uniform or not. At that point, as someone pointed out, all I would need to do real damage are my bare hands.
Having removed my dangerous water, or my suspicious toothpaste or my menacing shaving foam because I am not in uniform does not add one f
g thing to the security of that flight!!! Not to mention the dreaded look of death that our trusty min-wage TSA people shoot at you if you dare not carry items in a transparent, quart size, ziplock bag... 
what a joke! What does it have to do with safety on board. And can someone please explain me why, why, why the laptop needs to go in separately from the bag?
I can feel it coming, one of these days I will think out loud and I'll get myself in trouble.
What should happen is the following: if you carry a crew badge you walk through a dedicated crew access entrance, under supervision of the TSA/law enforcement. You normally don't get stopped, and you are not allowed to bring dangerous items on board, and the TSA can and will spot check crewmembers to ensure directives are followed.
Oh and one more thing...let's not forget that 95% of all cargo loaded downstairs on heavy iron birds (the ones more likely to appeal to the average bad guy) goes on board UNCHECKED!!! My toothpaste dangerous??? What a joke!
Having removed my dangerous water, or my suspicious toothpaste or my menacing shaving foam because I am not in uniform does not add one f
g thing to the security of that flight!!! Not to mention the dreaded look of death that our trusty min-wage TSA people shoot at you if you dare not carry items in a transparent, quart size, ziplock bag... what a joke! What does it have to do with safety on board. And can someone please explain me why, why, why the laptop needs to go in separately from the bag? I can feel it coming, one of these days I will think out loud and I'll get myself in trouble.
What should happen is the following: if you carry a crew badge you walk through a dedicated crew access entrance, under supervision of the TSA/law enforcement. You normally don't get stopped, and you are not allowed to bring dangerous items on board, and the TSA can and will spot check crewmembers to ensure directives are followed.
Oh and one more thing...let's not forget that 95% of all cargo loaded downstairs on heavy iron birds (the ones more likely to appeal to the average bad guy) goes on board UNCHECKED!!! My toothpaste dangerous??? What a joke!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Land of Ice and Fire
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security etc
Some interesting facts. At the Luxembourg airport, they had a new orifice created after a poor rating from the TSA fascists. So the result? They now take 6 months to issue a pass!!!! The security people are still waiting for a pass, some of them!!!! So they check the passes and man the gate, but CANNOT themselves go through the gate, as their pass hasnīt arrived!!!!!
The mechanics that havenīt received their permanent passes yet, are issued a day pass. However, those on the night shift, must go to the maingate 10 minutes before midnight and get a new pass...... Couldnīt they be issued a "shift" pass or a 24 hour pass? Of course, but that is not in the book, so there you are. So it is NOT just the UK........ there are security crazies everywhere!
I was driven directly through the gate at LHR to my plane last time.....0 security at all....right from the hotel. Go figure! At Stavanger, after arrival and being driven to the terminal by the fireman in the handling vehicle airside, is stopped en route and checked! I asked if the firemen would be checked if they were on the way to a fire at the terminal. Security got a worried look........
...probably being discussed on a higher level as we speak!
See the movie V........
ciao!
The mechanics that havenīt received their permanent passes yet, are issued a day pass. However, those on the night shift, must go to the maingate 10 minutes before midnight and get a new pass...... Couldnīt they be issued a "shift" pass or a 24 hour pass? Of course, but that is not in the book, so there you are. So it is NOT just the UK........ there are security crazies everywhere!
I was driven directly through the gate at LHR to my plane last time.....0 security at all....right from the hotel. Go figure! At Stavanger, after arrival and being driven to the terminal by the fireman in the handling vehicle airside, is stopped en route and checked! I asked if the firemen would be checked if they were on the way to a fire at the terminal. Security got a worried look........
...probably being discussed on a higher level as we speak!
See the movie V........
ciao!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U.K.
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of base pilots at a UK Airport (Can't tell you where;Security) Anyway,at "Beckam International" You can't follow the passenger route,but must go thro' the crew channel. You then must be escorted (By security) By secure routings,until you arrive at the passenger route.At this point you are considered secure enough to apply to security to allow you on to the ramp.A secure person,will then be called to let you access your airplane.Be warned;should you wish to inspect your aircraft before departure (For security reasons?) You will discover that the security staff cannot escort you while you carry out your walk round,as they are not allowed on the ramp.(For security reasons.) Have a nice day. It's hugely entertaining;the customer pays,and I wasn't doing any thing else that day. God bless Aviation. R.I.P
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was in the crew channel at a uk airport last week and security stopped a pass holder and refused to let them take their small container through because their porridge was too runny!
"A Pilot on Airline Security"
I hope this is the right forum, and it's not old news: I've found an interesting article with some comments, by a pilot, on airline and airport security. It talks about the TSA in the USA, but I don't that how the UK would be much different these days.
It's about how the crew and passengers getting on a plane are the focus of most security these days, but that focus may be a little misplaced... link.
It's about how the crew and passengers getting on a plane are the focus of most security these days, but that focus may be a little misplaced... link.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It dawned upon me that .................
[SNIP]
.....................Passengers are not screened before they go into the terminal and can take anything they want into such congested areas.
[SNIP]
.....................Passengers are not screened before they go into the terminal and can take anything they want into such congested areas.
Panman
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L O A and Panman,
All everybody can hope for, that they've never heard of PPRuNe, and that they've never thought of the half-dozen scenarios we can all think of without even really trying.
All everybody can hope for, that they've never heard of PPRuNe, and that they've never thought of the half-dozen scenarios we can all think of without even really trying.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: INS 130/55
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blithering
Had my mozzie spray confiscated at LHR while attempting to reach the A/C to operate a Lagos trip recently. I explained that this medication was required for me to "Do my job effectively as crew" as instructed by BALPA in their sensible security campaign. The retarded response was what I have come to expect in this deeply sick country. I meekly submitted and faced the LOS mozzies at dawn, unarmed. ...And finally... just through the screening at a BAA airport last week, in a shoeless semi naked condition, I was compelled to expose the soles of my feet to the security personnel. Have we achieved a new level, or was that an "Above and Beyond" level of stupidity?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Spain
Age: 50
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course the raw screening is not perfect and we donīt need our toothpaste to turn our office into a mass destruction weapon. But if weīre exempted of screening the chain is weakened. Eg: the terrorists burst in your home and put a gun in your wife and sonīs head and give you something you have to pass to somebody after the security. Just an scenario
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Out of the blue
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they do that they're dead anyway, and I would assume that before allowing the terrorists to change my mind about my responsibilities as commander.
The way out is simple. Stop persecuting everyone. Turn the full force of state security on the enemy by the use of profiling and invasive intelligence of targets.
They are at war with us,we should treat them as such and stop this ridiculous farce which is for PR purposes only.
The way out is simple. Stop persecuting everyone. Turn the full force of state security on the enemy by the use of profiling and invasive intelligence of targets.
They are at war with us,we should treat them as such and stop this ridiculous farce which is for PR purposes only.
I don't mind having my identity checked, not hard to impersonate a pilot is it ?
I don't mind my bag being x-rayed, remember the attempt to blow up an EL-AL flight by planting a bomb on a pregnant woman ? BTW Anyone been given luggage as a present ?
I don't mind the metal detector for the obvious stuff.
I do object to the petty restrictions such as tweezers and nail files. If I've passed the other tests what am I going to do with a small pair of round tipped scissors. I've got a crash axe behind me and the controls in my hands.
Also the manners of some of these security people leaves a lot to be desired. As well as regular checks on what can get through, the odd "mystery shopper" checking on how they deal with the public could improve their attitude no end. Some of them are very rude and ignorant.
I don't mind my bag being x-rayed, remember the attempt to blow up an EL-AL flight by planting a bomb on a pregnant woman ? BTW Anyone been given luggage as a present ?
I don't mind the metal detector for the obvious stuff.
I do object to the petty restrictions such as tweezers and nail files. If I've passed the other tests what am I going to do with a small pair of round tipped scissors. I've got a crash axe behind me and the controls in my hands.
Also the manners of some of these security people leaves a lot to be desired. As well as regular checks on what can get through, the odd "mystery shopper" checking on how they deal with the public could improve their attitude no end. Some of them are very rude and ignorant.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MD80, so why doesn't your argument apply to armed police who can stroll through security holding firearms which could be passed onto someone undesirable...
... or is being an unmarried orphan with no children part of their job criteria?
... or is being an unmarried orphan with no children part of their job criteria?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This topic has come up so many times.
If the screener knows you personally as a pilot, then sure, no need for any checks.
Otherwise you are someone in fancy dress with some apparent ID. Neither are too hard to fake. Airline ID isn't exactly banknote quality, (there's stuff loads of dodgy twenties still going round - hence the design change).
So then, the question of the Police. My guess here is that faking being airport Police (by dint of appearance) is VERY much harder. Any "colleague" is likely to clock it, and any screener used to dealing with the same team, in exactly the same uniform, day in day out, will pick up on something wrong.
For people who appear to be aircrew, there's no such consistency. Neither in terms of the faces in and out of a busy airport, their uniforms, anything.
Theoretically you could team up with a mate, get some MP5s, get the police uniform "just so", and hope you'll breeze it, but realistically it's sooo far off the scale. I'd guess you'd be had on CCTV in no time.
There's just no comparison, fake aircrew vs fake police, as a point of vulnerability - as I see it.
When I last posted on this subject, some years ago, I suggested a pass system that was tightly linked to the holder (i.e. biometric, and real time database linked). If I'm reading one of the posts above rightly, then this is now being discussed.
That's what's needed, and needs lobbying for.
If the screener knows you personally as a pilot, then sure, no need for any checks.
Otherwise you are someone in fancy dress with some apparent ID. Neither are too hard to fake. Airline ID isn't exactly banknote quality, (there's stuff loads of dodgy twenties still going round - hence the design change).
So then, the question of the Police. My guess here is that faking being airport Police (by dint of appearance) is VERY much harder. Any "colleague" is likely to clock it, and any screener used to dealing with the same team, in exactly the same uniform, day in day out, will pick up on something wrong.
For people who appear to be aircrew, there's no such consistency. Neither in terms of the faces in and out of a busy airport, their uniforms, anything.
Theoretically you could team up with a mate, get some MP5s, get the police uniform "just so", and hope you'll breeze it, but realistically it's sooo far off the scale. I'd guess you'd be had on CCTV in no time.
There's just no comparison, fake aircrew vs fake police, as a point of vulnerability - as I see it.
When I last posted on this subject, some years ago, I suggested a pass system that was tightly linked to the holder (i.e. biometric, and real time database linked). If I'm reading one of the posts above rightly, then this is now being discussed.
That's what's needed, and needs lobbying for.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a reasonable point, but I wasn't talking about impersonating anyone. md80classic wrote about the possibility of a pilot having his family at gunpoint and being forced to carry something dangerous through security.
I'm saying the same could be said of armed police but still they aren't subject to same degrading searches we are.
I'm saying the same could be said of armed police but still they aren't subject to same degrading searches we are.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lost
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In bygone days of my ex military service, "recognition" of ones colleagues indeed seemed to carry more weight than it does now. Anyone who was not recognised was given the appropriate consideration until the full ID had been established, then entry was allowed/denied as the case determined.
BR.
BR.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"md80classic wrote about the possibility of a pilot having his family at gunpoint and being forced to carry something dangerous through security.
I'm saying the same could be said of armed police but still they aren't subject to same degrading searches we are."
flyer4life... Point noted.
One could indeed threaten anyone with airside access on this basis. I'd still say it has parallels with my previous point, i.e. the vulnerability - I think - is much lower, aircrew vs. police.
What I sense though (and here I talk generally, not about you specifically flyer4), is arguments for *less* security, in relation to aircrew, on the basis of flaws elsewhere in the system.
If there are these flaws, shouldn't the argument be for *more* security?
Ostensibly one could say that there are posts here proposing that very idea, but the overall sentiment is... "It's not fair. I'm a pilot."
That's not a way to form a security policy. It's as it reads - a sentiment. Heartfelt, but not necessarily thought through.
I'm saying the same could be said of armed police but still they aren't subject to same degrading searches we are."
flyer4life... Point noted.
One could indeed threaten anyone with airside access on this basis. I'd still say it has parallels with my previous point, i.e. the vulnerability - I think - is much lower, aircrew vs. police.
What I sense though (and here I talk generally, not about you specifically flyer4), is arguments for *less* security, in relation to aircrew, on the basis of flaws elsewhere in the system.
If there are these flaws, shouldn't the argument be for *more* security?
Ostensibly one could say that there are posts here proposing that very idea, but the overall sentiment is... "It's not fair. I'm a pilot."
That's not a way to form a security policy. It's as it reads - a sentiment. Heartfelt, but not necessarily thought through.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone been on the East Apron at Norwich? I had to go through security to get ground side the other day 
*
For logic that beats Newquay, where I wasn't allowed coffee for myself, but was allowed to take it on when the handler (who had made it) said it was for my pax
Why try to take away my knife, when I'm the only one on the plane? Why refuse to allow sealed cans through, which I could not have tampered with and were anyway simply going to be passed through checked luggage by my handling agent and to me - I stow all luggage anyway, and have full access to it until I depart, so it seems pointless banning me from carrying things that are allowed in luggage.
This is what those who think pilots should be screened like pax seem to be missing, the complete lack of logic and consistency, and more important the lack of relevance to security.
It is also fighting against a threat that is no longer real. How many passengers would allow their aircraft to be taken since September 2001? How could terrorists use liquids to make a bomb, when scientists asked to try it showed that it would need a lot of time and a small laboratory, and even with that the process would be likely to kill or incapacitate the terrorist before any viable explosives are made unless they were skilled and experienced chemists.
This adds up to an illusion of security, that actually is detremental to security because people are looking the wrong way.
*For those unacquainted with Norwich, the East Apron is not within the secure area, for some unexplained reason. For my handling agent to take me to the terminal to go to my hotel, the easiest way was to drive me to the crew airside entrance.
*For logic that beats Newquay, where I wasn't allowed coffee for myself, but was allowed to take it on when the handler (who had made it) said it was for my pax
Why try to take away my knife, when I'm the only one on the plane? Why refuse to allow sealed cans through, which I could not have tampered with and were anyway simply going to be passed through checked luggage by my handling agent and to me - I stow all luggage anyway, and have full access to it until I depart, so it seems pointless banning me from carrying things that are allowed in luggage.
This is what those who think pilots should be screened like pax seem to be missing, the complete lack of logic and consistency, and more important the lack of relevance to security.
It is also fighting against a threat that is no longer real. How many passengers would allow their aircraft to be taken since September 2001? How could terrorists use liquids to make a bomb, when scientists asked to try it showed that it would need a lot of time and a small laboratory, and even with that the process would be likely to kill or incapacitate the terrorist before any viable explosives are made unless they were skilled and experienced chemists.
This adds up to an illusion of security, that actually is detremental to security because people are looking the wrong way.
*For those unacquainted with Norwich, the East Apron is not within the secure area, for some unexplained reason. For my handling agent to take me to the terminal to go to my hotel, the easiest way was to drive me to the crew airside entrance.