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

Security

Old 25th Dec 2010, 23:34
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Global Vagabond
Posts: 637
Received 30 Likes on 2 Posts
He mentions that ground staff just need a swipe card, I have to wonder what vetting ground staff have to go through to get such a swipe card...
mini is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 00:23
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The right side of the Pennines
Age: 73
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but if the "system" is good enough to 'vet' ground crew, it is surely also good enough to 'vet' aircrew ? Same system, same swipe card ? Why not ?

Ground crew should be more rigorously 'vetted' - after all, they can put the bomb on board without having to travel with it themselves !

It's only about a year ago that LAX discovered that ground crew going to work having parked their cars in the staff car park, then boarded a bus that dropped them off Airside, passing no security check ! even ones who were off duty carrying cabin baggage for the flight they were going to check in for.

( my source ? L.A. Times in 2009 )

Last edited by YorkshireTyke; 26th Dec 2010 at 05:48. Reason: text omission
YorkshireTyke is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 01:19
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" but if the "system" is good enough to 'vet' ground crew, it is surely also good enough to 'vet' aircrew ? Same system, same swipe card ? Why not ? "

A great idea....but, here's my questions: Are ground handlers union? If yes, WHAT union? But I'm sure I'm probably just being my usual cynical self!

"All animals are created equal....but SOME are MORE equal than others...."
- George Orwell, "Animal Farm"
PA-28-180 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 02:15
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there are experimental places where pilots can swipe a card, so to speak, and get in...

amazing though about the ground pounders.

I think it would be cheaper to just have a couple of marines on each plane, with orders to shoot to kill
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 02:26
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Depends on the airline... some ground staff are in unions and some are not.
RobertS975 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 04:54
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe it's because no ground staff were involved in the 9/11 plot, on the other hand...
NVpilot is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 05:52
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The right side of the Pennines
Age: 73
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What's being a member of a Union got to do with it ?

Are Union members exempt from this nonsense ?

It is up to the employer to guarantee that anyone that they give a 'swipe' card to, and therefore Airside access, is indeed a bone fide employee, and they can introduce as many security checks as they like before accepting one for engagement and issue a pass, if the individual, or the Union, don't like it - next please.
YorkshireTyke is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 06:27
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
He mentions that ground staff just need a swipe card, I have to wonder what vetting ground staff have to go through to get such a swipe card...
The best vetting in the world would not prevent the obvious coercion that such staff maybe subjected to to take something undesirable airside. But obviously it doesn't stop there. Catering truck, spares deliveries all go through a separate entrance. One would hope that materials and catering is checked as thoroughly as the passengers and cargo? But I doubt it.

but if the "system" is good enough to 'vet' ground crew, it is surely also good enough to 'vet' aircrew ? Same system, same swipe card ? Why not ?
Not really, aircrew cross boarders and it would seem sensible to ensure anybody travelling internationally should all be screened to the same standard (pax and staff). Even for domestic travel a diversion to a foreign alternate remains a possibility. It makes sense to have one process for aircrew that covers all angles.

I reckon that anybody going airside must go through the same process as the aircrew, not the other way around.
Sciolistes is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 06:50
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" What's being a member of a Union got to do with it ? "

It was in reference to the fact that for the past 2 years, unions in America (at least SOME unions) seem to get a 'pass' on just about everything - "but that's not important now".....guess I forgot to hit the 'sarcasm button' on my computer!
PA-28-180 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 07:11
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Security is a misnomer, there's a (presumably) vetted Security Officer at LHR who's currently working in a name which he created in order to get the job!
heli-cal is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 10:42
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Slightly off topic, but on Sky news the other night when talking about snow clearance at LHR, I'm sure it was mentioned that there were 150 contractors brought in to help clear the runway.
Do all these contractors hava an airside security clearance, I wonder? Or maybe when it suits the powers that be, it can all be glossed over.
clockwork is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 11:11
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NVPilot
Maybe it's because no ground staff were involved in the 9/11 plot, on the other hand...
In the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks there were numerous "boxcutters" found taped under various 1st class seats of several aircraft belonging to just one American airline.
SKS777FLYER is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 11:13
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Isle Dordt
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At Schiphol (Amsterdam) Airport I saw a checkpoint where ground staff had to run the metal detector before they were allowed outdoors. I think it must be logistically possible to have similar checks in the US. And I think that publicly disclosing security flaws is the only way to get them fixed at "organizations" like the TSA that seem unwilling to handle individual complaints.
MathFox is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 11:26
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I reckon that anybody going airside must go through the same process as the aircrew, not the other way around.
Sciolistes has it in one here. We all know, anecdotally, that the rules and procedures are not applied uniformly.

Until there is a will at political level for change, then nothing will change.

Aircrew only have themselves to blame for this situation arising. We should be very concerned about these disparities but until all crew members are on a united front little will change.

A day of action (or inaction) would force the issue. On a parallel if you told the train drivers and railway signallers that they couldnt take yogurts to work Bob Crowe at the RMT would have called an immediate strike, the network would have ground to a halt and it would have all been sorted within 24 hours!

Finally, the western world needs to ask itself the question as to what we are doing (and have done!) to cause "terrorists" to want to put bombs etc on aircraft?
fireflybob is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 13:02
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Isle Dordt
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am still waiting for a proper security trade-off made by the ones "in charge". What does it cost to catch all those [strike]liquid explosives[/strike] water bottles when the plot (if any) to blow up a plane with a lemonade bottle didn't even get near to an airport. Both the shoe and the underwear bomber didn't achieve more damage to the plane than some scorched carpet. Is there a cost-benefit analysis for passenger scanning?
MathFox is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 13:34
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MathFox
Is there a cost-benefit analysis for passenger scanning?
Oh yes...

Political cost of being seen to do nothing: high
Political cost of being seen to do something which sounds impressive but is actually ineffectual and eventually fails: much lower, maybe nil if it takes long enough to fail

Cost of buying / running acutal scanning measures: nil - pass to passengers
Benefit of buying / running scanning: high - big profits for security theatre companies
[guess which of the above groups lobbies the politicians ?]

Cost of increased security queues: nil (well, for the airport...)
Benefit of increase security queues: lots - charge em more for a fast-track queue!

Cost of increased check-in to gate time: nil (except for the pax...)
Benefit of increased check-in to gate time: lots more time in the shopping mall...

...and so on.
infrequentflyer789 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 13:42
  #37 (permalink)  
Sir George Cayley
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Flaws in the use of ID swipe cards.

I had one for 12 years - the photo was updated only twice over that period so I didn't resemble the photo at times.

I grew a beard but didn't have to have a new photo.

I had to start wearing spectacles but didn't need a new photo.

You can see where this is going... if someone obtains another persons ID swipe card it wouldn't take much to appear like the small photo on the card.

Either that or hold the poor victim's family hostage to make them take something airside.

Finally, talking in general about security, ask what B I B means?

Sir George Cayley
 
Old 26th Dec 2010, 13:59
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
fireflybob
Finally, the western world needs to ask itself the question as to what we are doing (and have done!) to cause "terrorists" to want to put bombs etc on aircraft?
It would seem the desire to kill seemingly indiscriminately by whacked out fundamentalists is not at all limited to the western world. They are quite happy suicide bombing fellow Muslims in huge numbers whether it be east or west. Simply put for you, if you ain't one of the "terrorists" as you put it, then in their mind, no matter who you are or what society you live in, you are only fit for extermination.
SKS777FLYER is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 14:02
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Historically, regimes which start off democratic may become authoritarian by extending the limits of state bureaucracy. This may be manifest in the security apparatus and under the cover of an external (or internal) threat justification.
Our current course may yet result in a victory for the terrorists as the freedom which we cherish and they despise is encroached and progressively dismantled.
Al-Qaeda network a failure: US cable - Yahoo!7
And yet the 'war' continues.
Jabiman is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2010, 16:02
  #40 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Robert Campbell

It is as you say. The system at SMF is ridiculous. Pilot's are consistently having to find access to the ramp in ways that cause them inconvenience and cost them time. It is this "Card Entry" baloney that is at the heart of the problem. TSA is a cf.

bear
 

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.