Airport security
Not all the time but the Germans and Belgians think Jews have holes in the tops of their heads. Every time a Jew with a skullcap (kippah) goes through security, even something as small as about 8cm in diameter and 1.5mm thick, they ask to look underneath. Nothing that small and thin, especially on a balding person (sigh) could be hidden that could cause any injury unless someone had bored out a hole in my skull. It's rude and stupid.
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: China
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They take away your toothpaste, but will happily sell you any 1 litre 80% proof bottle of booze in duty free. That's s really efficient way of preventing large quantities of flammable liquid getting on to planes.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kopavogur
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Airport security in the UK does not seem to understand is the fact that the regulations are ONLY valid for Passenger screening and NOT for operating crew!
Show me any EASA document where it states that operating crew must be subject to the same liquid limitations as passengers.
There is non.
NO EASA country has any liquid limits for operating crew, as they are following the regulations, the UK is NOT.
Simple.
Show me any EASA document where it states that operating crew must be subject to the same liquid limitations as passengers.
There is non.
NO EASA country has any liquid limits for operating crew, as they are following the regulations, the UK is NOT.
Simple.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ABKUT
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully appreciate the job security are there, and for the most part try to do. However, my problem is that I fear so many agents are obsessed with the ‘SOPS’s’ if you like, stopping my yoghurt etc, they may miss the actual threat!
If the money was right they’d attract a better quality applicant, people clean sewers but not for minimum wage. With higher pay, security guards would value their jobs which would lead to them having a better attitude.
Curiously I'm a former automotive engineer; a colleague once commented to me that the ideal car component was something you could throw in the general direction of the car from two metres away, and it would fit right every time. There's an awful lot in a car which is designed as much for the 30 seconds it is being fitted as for the decade or two which follows.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly as pax a lot several million miles in the last few years and go through security a lot as that was mainly shorthaul. I get on well with the security/TSA staff - but there are times when the jobsworths make the process irritating - some more than most. As part of my rather eclectic background I test systems and concepts, I also spent some years in the military. So i set out a semi-formal test plan for airport security with 10 very simple tests based on what has happened before with those who would wish to cause harm.
Airport security at all airports fails ALL the tests with the possible exception of Israeli security. A recent bombing almost followed one of my scripts and was 'successful'.
While I am sure that the security staff are doing their jobs according to the rules laid down by bureaucrats in distant offices they may be better having some training from people that have had to deal with a higher bad guy to good guy ratio to check. They would be a whole lot more cautious and a whole lot more effective,.
I won't say a lot more but security at airports needs a black team. The entire security line system really needs a rethink. All the tests could be passed with minor changes to the way things are done.
Unfortunately, nobody in security seems to be interested.
Airport security at all airports fails ALL the tests with the possible exception of Israeli security. A recent bombing almost followed one of my scripts and was 'successful'.
While I am sure that the security staff are doing their jobs according to the rules laid down by bureaucrats in distant offices they may be better having some training from people that have had to deal with a higher bad guy to good guy ratio to check. They would be a whole lot more cautious and a whole lot more effective,.
I won't say a lot more but security at airports needs a black team. The entire security line system really needs a rethink. All the tests could be passed with minor changes to the way things are done.
Unfortunately, nobody in security seems to be interested.
It has to be said though that in modern airports worldwide the incidence of terrorist related activity is remarkably low. When was the last terrorist related attack on a plane? The Russian A321 from Sharm? More people have died since from pilot error/fatigue. So whilst we all find security a pain and the personnel sometimes rude and brainless, the system has worked, despite stupidity from the managers. It would be nicer if the system was more efficient, more flexible and more user friendly but ultimately it still needs to work for the lowest cost possible.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Inverness
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Security
The current useless security measures wouldn't have prevented 9/11. The answer is profiling so that resources can be concentrated on where the risk is most likely to come from, and not on body scanning a 5 year old going on holiday with his Mum and Dad
Some replies and attitudes in this thread are truly depressing.
Some folk seem to treat security as a personal affront, but I suspect that many who have bad experiences in security might bring it upon themselves with their behaviour, expression, attitude or body language. I feel sorry for the likes of Will 161 who have to put up with it.
Then we have the fire axe or Jet A1 brigade. Or ‘the scanner didn’t beep for me last week or yesterday’.
The poster who talked about the security “bullsh*t” of liquids, shoes, laptops etc. These are all based on actual foiled or known attempts to blow up airliners.
I am not privvy to the latest findings of MI5 or MI6, but they have to impose rules - based on actual threats - that are easy to implement and easy for every one to follow.
Why not simply follow the rules - which might be different in different places, or on different days - and be polite and not take any offence?
Some folk seem to treat security as a personal affront, but I suspect that many who have bad experiences in security might bring it upon themselves with their behaviour, expression, attitude or body language. I feel sorry for the likes of Will 161 who have to put up with it.
Then we have the fire axe or Jet A1 brigade. Or ‘the scanner didn’t beep for me last week or yesterday’.
The poster who talked about the security “bullsh*t” of liquids, shoes, laptops etc. These are all based on actual foiled or known attempts to blow up airliners.
I am not privvy to the latest findings of MI5 or MI6, but they have to impose rules - based on actual threats - that are easy to implement and easy for every one to follow.
Why not simply follow the rules - which might be different in different places, or on different days - and be polite and not take any offence?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some replies and attitudes in this thread are truly depressing.
Some folk seem to treat security as a personal affront, but I suspect that many who have bad experiences in security might bring it upon themselves with their behaviour, expression, attitude or body language. I feel sorry for the likes of Will 161 who have to put up with it.
Then we have the fire axe or Jet A1 brigade. Or ‘the scanner didn’t beep for me last week or yesterday’.
The poster who talked about the security “bullsh*t” of liquids, shoes, laptops etc. These are all based on actual foiled or known attempts to blow up airliners.
I am not privvy to the latest findings of MI5 or MI6, but they have to impose rules - based on actual threats - that are easy to implement and easy for every one to follow.
Why not simply follow the rules - which might be different in different places, or on different days - and be polite and not take any offence?
Some folk seem to treat security as a personal affront, but I suspect that many who have bad experiences in security might bring it upon themselves with their behaviour, expression, attitude or body language. I feel sorry for the likes of Will 161 who have to put up with it.
Then we have the fire axe or Jet A1 brigade. Or ‘the scanner didn’t beep for me last week or yesterday’.
The poster who talked about the security “bullsh*t” of liquids, shoes, laptops etc. These are all based on actual foiled or known attempts to blow up airliners.
I am not privvy to the latest findings of MI5 or MI6, but they have to impose rules - based on actual threats - that are easy to implement and easy for every one to follow.
Why not simply follow the rules - which might be different in different places, or on different days - and be polite and not take any offence?
Fully agreed.
Also everyone, please remember two things:
1. If they seem offhand even when you are trying to be helpful you can be sure that, unless it is the beginning of their shift, they have already taken abuse from someone going through.
2. They are watched on CCTV and can be fired for gross misconduct if they are seen to deliberately not follow the rules that have been set for them
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally have zero issue with security going by the rules in which they are told to enforce, I know i cannot get liquids through over a certain amount in the UK, its not the security persons fault its the CAA/DFT's fault. Its ridiculous that we cant get basic hygiene products through security, but its not the security persons fault
what does touch my nerve is inconsistantcy, one minute i can get this through the next i cant, One person says i can do this one says i cant, I do not like being treated like a terrorist because i left a half drunk bottle of water in my bag and guess what i didnt try and sneak it past yout it was an accident.
The other thing which is very scary is that People are getting things through security that are actually dangerous, knives/tools etc because said security personel is too busy trying to "catch" someone with a bottle of water or a 101ml bottle of contact lense solution, I agree if they paid people correctly we wouldnt get so many jobsworth security personel who are just out to get one over someone
what does touch my nerve is inconsistantcy, one minute i can get this through the next i cant, One person says i can do this one says i cant, I do not like being treated like a terrorist because i left a half drunk bottle of water in my bag and guess what i didnt try and sneak it past yout it was an accident.
The other thing which is very scary is that People are getting things through security that are actually dangerous, knives/tools etc because said security personel is too busy trying to "catch" someone with a bottle of water or a 101ml bottle of contact lense solution, I agree if they paid people correctly we wouldnt get so many jobsworth security personel who are just out to get one over someone
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: europe
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Curiously I'm a former automotive engineer; a colleague once commented to me that the ideal car component was something you could throw in the general direction of the car from two metres away, and it would fit right every time. There's an awful lot in a car which is designed as much for the 30 seconds it is being fitted as for the decade or two which follows.
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Bristol,
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not crew but work at a UK airport. I've never had any issues with security, I take my electronics out my bag and i keep my hand sanitiser, moisturiser and water bottle in a plastic bag and they've only swabbed that once in my year there. The security are all very friendly at said airport and they as standard practise i think swab every 1 in 4...
I understand and share the frustrations highlighted by posters. On the basis that it's completely futile to allow the security process to irritate me, I have changed my attitude. I remain polite, do as requested on the day (it varies, even at the same airport) and get the ordeal over with as quickly as possible. 
In the USA, the TSA has greatly improved and is now only failing around 80% of tests compared to 95% a couple of years ago.
Does Airport Security Save Lives or Cost Them? - UCSD Guardian
Israeli security works but requires 3+ hours check in time and the government has to pick up 80% of ELALs security costs or the airline would go broke. Passengers are profiled and whilst everyone is thoroughly screened, a young Arab male wearing a bandana would be looked at more closely than a 70 year old rabbi. Intelligence officers interview passengers as part of the process.
Does Airport Security Save Lives or Cost Them? - UCSD Guardian
Israeli security works but requires 3+ hours check in time and the government has to pick up 80% of ELALs security costs or the airline would go broke. Passengers are profiled and whilst everyone is thoroughly screened, a young Arab male wearing a bandana would be looked at more closely than a 70 year old rabbi. Intelligence officers interview passengers as part of the process.
