STN Security declares war on pilots
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Inverted
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was on shift the morning it happened. I never went over to look cause i did not want to give the protesters the satisfaction of a crowd. But what does annoy me is the constant hassel when going through sercurity. We as engineers and pilots have the most access to the aircraft and yet it seems we are the ones that get penalised for our jobs. They study your lunch box, touch you up as though you are joe average. If the CAA trusts us with aircraft while do we have to prove it to security personnel. I understand that we need ID to access and thats not a problem but when half the way down the road, potentially dangerous people are maybe putting peoples lives at risk, where are the sercuity guards. Maybe BAA you need to let us engineers and pilots do our jobs and get the so called security to start doing theres!! Securing the airfield, not stopping us licenced personnel from getting on the airfield. Next time ill just go the way the portesters went, seems an easier way of getting on the airfield!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Major London Airport
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough Is Enough
National ID cards - didn't stop the Red Army Faction in Germany
didn't stop the train bombers in Madrid.
Enough is enough - I need to get out of the looney bin that is aviation security.
Hence I am one of several I know who are retiring early - PLEASE - LET ME OUT OF HERE ! The lunatics are running the asylum !
didn't stop the train bombers in Madrid.
Enough is enough - I need to get out of the looney bin that is aviation security.
Hence I am one of several I know who are retiring early - PLEASE - LET ME OUT OF HERE ! The lunatics are running the asylum !
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to Basics
It begs the question "What is the security in place to secure or protect?"
Is it the aircrew? In that case causing us stress and / or difficulty in completing, or even starting, or assigned task is an abject failure on the part of the DfT.
Is it the aircraft? We are responsible for the physical security of the aircraft: we have to secure the aircraft when we leave it. I don't see the airport providing security staff for that. Even if the aircraft is on the ramp we can't leave it with the steps attached, doors open because it is "unsecure". So if the ramp and airside is an insecure area why are we checked and subjected to search and confiscation every day?
Is it the passenger? What are the securing them from? Is it us? Then it raises another query in that WE are responsible for the safety of the occupants as soon as they board.
The whole thing is a can of worms and persecuting aircrew is an easy abdication of responsibility for security.
Is it the aircrew? In that case causing us stress and / or difficulty in completing, or even starting, or assigned task is an abject failure on the part of the DfT.
Is it the aircraft? We are responsible for the physical security of the aircraft: we have to secure the aircraft when we leave it. I don't see the airport providing security staff for that. Even if the aircraft is on the ramp we can't leave it with the steps attached, doors open because it is "unsecure". So if the ramp and airside is an insecure area why are we checked and subjected to search and confiscation every day?
Is it the passenger? What are the securing them from? Is it us? Then it raises another query in that WE are responsible for the safety of the occupants as soon as they board.
The whole thing is a can of worms and persecuting aircrew is an easy abdication of responsibility for security.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: moving around the aviation world!
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slim Shady, you questions a good one of which originally I'm sure their was a very valid answer. However over time the plot has been lost and security nowadays is there to protect the employment of the people who failed miserably to get any stars in Micky D's.
It has nothing to do with security now and everything to do with money and a business plan. Thats from the top to the bottom. It really is a golden moneyspinner, fed on fear and devised to make the general public "think" they're safe. A window dressing exercise comes to mind.
The escapade at STN this week just highlights how ineffective these security people (I use the word in its broadest possible terms and really mean muppets) can secure anything.
I pass through their banal routine daily and quite often travel round to other airports, the standards are totally different depending on where you go but at STN they excel in making it as miserable process as possible.
Many things are secure, prisons, government installations, military enclosures including bases etc and all of them survive on one basic requirement. To look at the fence and make sure nobody gets in OR out! This is done by patrolling said perimeter fences and being observent. Not sat on you arse gassing about who did what to whom last night or moaning about other collegues (see above)/ managers/passengers/staff/money or anything else this sad and miserable bunch find to whinge about whilst frisking you. For every checkpoint/scanner there are normally at least x6 security staff whinging, why not kick x4 outside to go for a little walk around the fence (thats 4 from EVERY checkpoint) and we'd probably have a more secure enviroment. Their would certainly be a lot less whinging in earshot of anyone and think of the health benefits to the staff. Good employers should always think of the health of there staff
Of course its cold out there, dark too. Do what us engineers do. Invest in warm thermals, warm clothing, wooly hats and gloves and move about. Gets the blood circulating and gets you warm. Ok, Its not as nice as being in a nice warm terminal giving all and sundry crap but if you don't like it................... jog off to Burger King!
If we must be saddled with these muppets in their ever increasing number at least make them perform a task they're capable of, (ie.walking with your eyes open?) and let the rest of us get on with our jobs albeit flying or fixing the multi million pound machines to allow our ever adoring public to travel safely and without the worry that the pilot or engineers been given so much aggro getting into work his mind is distracted to the point where safety could be compromised.
Thats all we ask isn't it???
And just what is security in place to secure or protect anyway ????????
It has nothing to do with security now and everything to do with money and a business plan. Thats from the top to the bottom. It really is a golden moneyspinner, fed on fear and devised to make the general public "think" they're safe. A window dressing exercise comes to mind.
The escapade at STN this week just highlights how ineffective these security people (I use the word in its broadest possible terms and really mean muppets) can secure anything.
I pass through their banal routine daily and quite often travel round to other airports, the standards are totally different depending on where you go but at STN they excel in making it as miserable process as possible.
Many things are secure, prisons, government installations, military enclosures including bases etc and all of them survive on one basic requirement. To look at the fence and make sure nobody gets in OR out! This is done by patrolling said perimeter fences and being observent. Not sat on you arse gassing about who did what to whom last night or moaning about other collegues (see above)/ managers/passengers/staff/money or anything else this sad and miserable bunch find to whinge about whilst frisking you. For every checkpoint/scanner there are normally at least x6 security staff whinging, why not kick x4 outside to go for a little walk around the fence (thats 4 from EVERY checkpoint) and we'd probably have a more secure enviroment. Their would certainly be a lot less whinging in earshot of anyone and think of the health benefits to the staff. Good employers should always think of the health of there staff
Of course its cold out there, dark too. Do what us engineers do. Invest in warm thermals, warm clothing, wooly hats and gloves and move about. Gets the blood circulating and gets you warm. Ok, Its not as nice as being in a nice warm terminal giving all and sundry crap but if you don't like it................... jog off to Burger King!
If we must be saddled with these muppets in their ever increasing number at least make them perform a task they're capable of, (ie.walking with your eyes open?) and let the rest of us get on with our jobs albeit flying or fixing the multi million pound machines to allow our ever adoring public to travel safely and without the worry that the pilot or engineers been given so much aggro getting into work his mind is distracted to the point where safety could be compromised.
Thats all we ask isn't it???
And just what is security in place to secure or protect anyway ????????
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U K
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As to the proteters incident, surley if the head of security had any balls he would have just thrown a cordon arround these people and let the airlines get on flyng. From where they seem to have been, I can't see how this would be a problem. A case of another manager unable to manage me thinks!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best bit is that the protesters do not have to hold an ID card but we will!
Having said that, at least they had the balls to carry out some form of action, to raise the profile of what they believe in. More than could be said for most of the people who post on here!
Having said that, at least they had the balls to carry out some form of action, to raise the profile of what they believe in. More than could be said for most of the people who post on here!
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Five years ago I had to move job from Stansted to Gatwick. I had been a holder of an official (first military and then civilian) pass since 1964. Since I was no longer Stansted based I had to surrender the pass. Despite Gatwick being operated by the same people (BAA), I still had to apply for and submit to the full CRB security check. Then I occassionally had reason to start my working week at Stansted. Pray, how could I do that now? Seems to me someone in the "management" thinks all movements at Stansted are Stansted-based crews, purely on day-return flights. Maybe a look out of the window at the (gasp!) foreign aircraft would give them an idea of what is happening in the real world.
(retreats back to happy retirement)
(retreats back to happy retirement)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ballsout
I've been wondering about that, but assumed that in some way the protestors had managed to render the airfield non-operational by creating an obstruction where none is allowed under ICAO ie CAP168.
If they were blocking a taxiway, but not infringing a take-off or kanding surface or in the strip, operations could have continued, I would have thought, although probably at a slow rate. Better than nothing, though.
The hole in the fence could have been guarded to preserve security, with the protestors contained in their pen. I would simply have left them there, incommunicado ie no press, forbidden to leave, and carried on operating until they begged to be let out one by one for food, warmth or a loo, when each one would have been taken to one of a variety of different places within 15 miles or so and left there. But then I don't run an airport any more.
Above all else I would not have called the Police, and it was that which probably resulted in airport closure as their bovine, instant and unnecessary reaction to the problem..
What are the facts of the matter? Anyone really know, please?
It's the same management that failed to keep LGW open today, of course, with what by any standard was a huge cock-up.
I've been wondering about that, but assumed that in some way the protestors had managed to render the airfield non-operational by creating an obstruction where none is allowed under ICAO ie CAP168.
If they were blocking a taxiway, but not infringing a take-off or kanding surface or in the strip, operations could have continued, I would have thought, although probably at a slow rate. Better than nothing, though.
The hole in the fence could have been guarded to preserve security, with the protestors contained in their pen. I would simply have left them there, incommunicado ie no press, forbidden to leave, and carried on operating until they begged to be let out one by one for food, warmth or a loo, when each one would have been taken to one of a variety of different places within 15 miles or so and left there. But then I don't run an airport any more.
Above all else I would not have called the Police, and it was that which probably resulted in airport closure as their bovine, instant and unnecessary reaction to the problem..
What are the facts of the matter? Anyone really know, please?
It's the same management that failed to keep LGW open today, of course, with what by any standard was a huge cock-up.
From where they seem to have been, I can't see how this would be a problem.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These might have caused a problem for the ILS
A suspect ILS indication should still not have totally stopped operations; especially departures, although it could have been restricting and slowed things up.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: N5153.4 E00015.1
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facts
Sorry to jump on those people who are suggesting this was brought on by the issues at STN earlier this week, but the notice was actually communicated to airlines on 27 Nov.
The actual directive is quite clear and it does not state the ID must be issued by BAA, only that it is a valid ID issued either by the aerodrome or by another competent body authorised to issue passes.
A pilot's licence or boarding card should not be used to gain access to the RZ when the holder is on duty.
All seems pretty reasonable to me
Now - as for car-parking and the 36hr limit - that's a whole other issue
The actual directive is quite clear and it does not state the ID must be issued by BAA, only that it is a valid ID issued either by the aerodrome or by another competent body authorised to issue passes.
A pilot's licence or boarding card should not be used to gain access to the RZ when the holder is on duty.
All seems pretty reasonable to me
Now - as for car-parking and the 36hr limit - that's a whole other issue
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sorry to jump on those people who are suggesting this was brought on by the issues at STN earlier this week, but the notice was actually communicated to airlines on 27 Nov."
Another classic bit of totally inept FR managment !!!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: lgw
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was all probably precipitated by RYR having avoided getting passes for years. Using Random crews on licences, not applying for diddly and generally taking the piss to suit themselves.
If a robust id system had been in place for a while , ryr's operations would have been well fecked since about 2003 with their transient and licence validated foreign workforce. The caa havent the balls to stop em , maybe this will slow them down abit. Thats why they delayed telling you so its your problem not theirs and they can **** you some more. Your call to join them...reap what you sow. Does anyone know where I can get a security clearance for Poland....no didnt think so. SO MArek have you any convictions...NO...great bring your licence your in.
Real happiness was the last time I dealt with RYR not V1 at lagos.
Personnally I like having my balls felt by anyone so Ive always enjoyed STN , buts that just me.
If a robust id system had been in place for a while , ryr's operations would have been well fecked since about 2003 with their transient and licence validated foreign workforce. The caa havent the balls to stop em , maybe this will slow them down abit. Thats why they delayed telling you so its your problem not theirs and they can **** you some more. Your call to join them...reap what you sow. Does anyone know where I can get a security clearance for Poland....no didnt think so. SO MArek have you any convictions...NO...great bring your licence your in.
Real happiness was the last time I dealt with RYR not V1 at lagos.
Personnally I like having my balls felt by anyone so Ive always enjoyed STN , buts that just me.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but I've got to cut to the chase. The airport security industry is just that, and a parasitic industry to boot. If they are not careful they will find themselves in the predicament of the unsuccessful parasite that kills the host.
No excuse for their misplaced focus
No excuse for their misplaced focus
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BAA has been taking lessons!
Total Security is provided by building your vulnerable facility in the middle of nowhere, putting a high chain-link fence around it and guarding the entrance gate with a bunch of brainless muppets.
This is the set-up as seen in countless films featuring such stars as Steven Segal, Jean Claude Van Damm and Sly Stallone. The facility generally houses lots of highly flammable, even explosive units along with lots of scurrying, terrified and screaming prisoners.
Now, if I was in charge of something like a group of airports for instance, this is exactly the way I would go about it and then I would get my friend Alan, who used to be a screen writer before he joined Group 4, to be head of security.
Is the job vacant do you think?
Total Security is provided by building your vulnerable facility in the middle of nowhere, putting a high chain-link fence around it and guarding the entrance gate with a bunch of brainless muppets.
This is the set-up as seen in countless films featuring such stars as Steven Segal, Jean Claude Van Damm and Sly Stallone. The facility generally houses lots of highly flammable, even explosive units along with lots of scurrying, terrified and screaming prisoners.
Now, if I was in charge of something like a group of airports for instance, this is exactly the way I would go about it and then I would get my friend Alan, who used to be a screen writer before he joined Group 4, to be head of security.
Is the job vacant do you think?
Why not start a petition?
instead of ranting here, why don't you petition the PM to create standards across the UK? At least he won't be sitting there happy as Larry wondering why the air transport system is breaking down!
You can do it electronically here:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/communicate/e-petitions
You can do it electronically here:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/communicate/e-petitions
I thought that Pilots anyway in the UK had a union, what are those at 81 New Road doing to sort out this mess.
UK airports appear to becomming the same as in the USA, to best be avoided if at all possible.
UK airports appear to becomming the same as in the USA, to best be avoided if at all possible.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Wanabee
Surely all airlines in the UK have airport passes for their aircrew at their main operating bases.... don't they? If not it is clearly an issue with the airline concerned and nothing to do with the BAA or security. Is someone trying to save costs by getting round the system?
The actual directive is quite clear and it does not state the ID must be issued by BAA, only that it is a valid ID issued either by the aerodrome or by another competent body authorised to issue passes.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Perth
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LTN Security
The other day I was positioning through LTN in uniform. I had a ticket so went thro security with pax. Was told by a security staff member to remove my company ID pass. I asked why and was told that it was a security risk to have "passengers" wearing ID tags. I didnt even bother to answer.
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
It is a strict BAA requirement that ID passes must not be on show when going through security as a passenger, and infringement can result in total confiscation of the pass! Ignorance is no excuse- even though you may never have seen any such rule elsewhere if you were non-BAA!
I wear mine on a lanyard with the pass in a shirt pocket. One of the muppets said 'what is in your pocket?' because the beeper kept going off. I pulled out the ID card and said 'ID'. He then started to object saying 'you must not wear an ID card!' I tried to say as patiently as possible I wasn't and it was he who insisted I get it out! Best talk to them very slowly and quietly, and not use big words!
BALPA is as powerless as we are. Believe me, they have tried raising the problem everywhere! It has to be accepted that with every incident, a response by the politicians has to be demonstrated. It is far easier to make visible and obvious 'improvements' in security to the relatively few crew rather than to the great mass of people who pass thrugh security. The politicians and civil servants then have a tick in the box of 'adequate response given?' What is going on in this newly created security empire/monster transcends even BALPA. Actually it also transcends even the CAA. It goes right up to the minister and DfT, and whilst 'incidents' are continually occuring, the last thing they will do is backpeddle on security in any way. The ongoing risk of an obligatory resignation will stop them easing off security requirements in any way. While nutters drive into terminals and idiots attack airports, we are stuck with this other bunch of idiots and incompetents called 'security' and the 'BAA'!
The one way we can control this is henceforth, any aeroplane with a politician on board will mysteriously not depart UK shores until they remove their useless carcase. It is the only thing that will get them listening and doing something. Nothing else will work! With the enormous breaks they have, they are seasoned travellers. Spoil that and we will get them listening.
I wear mine on a lanyard with the pass in a shirt pocket. One of the muppets said 'what is in your pocket?' because the beeper kept going off. I pulled out the ID card and said 'ID'. He then started to object saying 'you must not wear an ID card!' I tried to say as patiently as possible I wasn't and it was he who insisted I get it out! Best talk to them very slowly and quietly, and not use big words!
BALPA is as powerless as we are. Believe me, they have tried raising the problem everywhere! It has to be accepted that with every incident, a response by the politicians has to be demonstrated. It is far easier to make visible and obvious 'improvements' in security to the relatively few crew rather than to the great mass of people who pass thrugh security. The politicians and civil servants then have a tick in the box of 'adequate response given?' What is going on in this newly created security empire/monster transcends even BALPA. Actually it also transcends even the CAA. It goes right up to the minister and DfT, and whilst 'incidents' are continually occuring, the last thing they will do is backpeddle on security in any way. The ongoing risk of an obligatory resignation will stop them easing off security requirements in any way. While nutters drive into terminals and idiots attack airports, we are stuck with this other bunch of idiots and incompetents called 'security' and the 'BAA'!
The one way we can control this is henceforth, any aeroplane with a politician on board will mysteriously not depart UK shores until they remove their useless carcase. It is the only thing that will get them listening and doing something. Nothing else will work! With the enormous breaks they have, they are seasoned travellers. Spoil that and we will get them listening.