Take your shoes off - Aviation security

[Earthmover]

The best, the very best 'search' I ever saw was my F/O's cheese roll - still sealed in cellophane with the 'sell-by' date, price and label intact - solemnly making its way, in splendid isolation, through the X-ray machine.

Much of the subsequent flight was spent in discussing whether she should eat it or not. I rather alarmed her by suggesting that the radiation might have produced some genetic modifications. She ate it though.

I visit her in the zoo as often as I can

One has to take a sideways look at all this and find the amusing side in order not to 'lose the plot' and start foaming at the mouth.

[sky9]

Surely the real question is why has it taken so long to check shoes? The easiest way to take a Stanley knife blade through security is within the shoe. Whether it should be just pilots or everyone who should be checked is debatable.

The reality is that infiltrating a terrorist into the crew of an aircraft is the easiest way to achieve their ends, especially using cabin staff.

What we really need is proper profiling of staff and passengers, until that happens we are all very vunerable.

[Doors to Automatic]

Bugg Smasher

No offence mate - My comments were not intended to be anti-American (I am one of the least anti-American Brits you will find) just an observation of what I have found on my recent trips which seems to defy all manner of common sense and delivered without the slightest hint of courtesy.

In terms of a solution - they should come over to the UK or Germany and see how its done - and how it has been done for the many years when it used to be possible to waltz airside in the US without any hint of a challenge.

As far as the shoe bomber is concerned - he is no Englishman. As far as I'm concerned you guys should have completely free reign with him. Personally I'd have made sure he was well away from any aircraft and then lit his fuse for him.

[tightcircuit]

How deep is the security screening we are put through when we take up employment? I don't know. I have thought since not long after all the new security measures were put in place, that the next passenger missile will be flown by someone who nomally sits in the flightdeck anyway. He may be being trained right now.

But there is an easier way for Osama. Next time a newly recruited cabin staff member comes through that security door to bring you a nice cup of tea just ponder the point. What security vetting did he/she recieve?

Taking your shoes off at the security check isn't going to stop a determined and resourceful terrorist.

Sleep tight all

[Zipperhead]

This was todays Dr. Fun cartoon.....

http://www.ibiblio.org/Dave/Dr-Fun/d...df20021212.jpg

[innuendo]

Some time ago one of our pilots had his house broken into and among the items stolen were both his uniforms.
I'd say that until crew are identifiable as being who they are supposed to be (Iris scanning etc.) then these security procedures are here to stay.
I don't think anyone has a monopoly on officiousness (!).
As the possesor of a titanium hip joint I have actualy had to doff my drawers, in the privacy of a curtained cubicle, to show the scar as proof to security at CDG.

[bugg smasher]

That may be so, Doors, but I transit UK and German airports monthly, and the security procedures in place are as sadly lacking as they are in the US. If you are in possession of a different story, if you are not threatened by the Bedouin assassins, kindly illuminate.

I belabor a well-worn point when I say that the monstrous rape of that September has made us all more than a little edgy over here, and will continue to loom grim and implausibly frightening in the American psyche for the foreseeable future.

The overkill currently in force is a predictable and very human reaction to trauma of that magnitude. Despite some corrosive and brazenly ill-conceived posts on this forum, we remain your friends in spirit and in deed, as we hope you do. Kindly bear with us, at some point, the Yanks eventually get around to sorting it out.

[Bigears]

Is there a good reason why coins are x-rayed?
'Yes' or 'no' will do as an answer, so as not to give anything away which may be helpful to others.

[zerozero]

Cheers Bigears!

Coins set off the metal detector. Of course it depends on how many coins and how high they've turned up the sensitivity on the damn machine (seems to vary from airport to airport).

It's just easier to send all your coins and other metallic objects (pens, ID badge clips, watches, etc) through the x-ray with your coat.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the absurdity of some security procedures. In fact what I despise most is the reactionary nature of the procedures:

Flights hijacked with guns; x-ray/metal detector
Flights hijacked with box cutters; no sharp objects allowed.
Attempted inflight detonation; shoe removal.

I shudder at the next possible hijack attempt. Will the weapon/explosive be hidden in a huge afro/beehive style hair-doo? What about those body cavities? I mean if you're intent on blowing yourself up anyway...

ah nevermind.

My point: I wouldn't mind the airport security hassle so much if I really thought they were looking ahead to prevent terrorism. Sadly they're only closing the barn doors after the horses have all run away.

[Bigears]

Usually I've had to place the coins in a dish with bypasses the metal detector. However, at one particular airport, I was asked to put them through the xray machine. Maybe its just custom to do it that way there

[Feather #3]

Joke for the day;

While undergoing one of these procedures, one of our F/O's asked the 'examiner' if he'd be allowed to have an axe on board with a blade on one side and a point on the other. The guy had a fit and said that it would be absolutely forbidden!! "Then, why am I sitting within a couple of feet of one for the next 11 hours?" was the reply!

Especially in the US, when one is sealed in behind a door, these crew checks are a public farce!!

G'day

[Kingfisher]

I read in US papers that alot of Cabin crew were finding their homes broken into and uniforms AND ID passes were being stolen. I dont mind being searched as flight crew but it would be nice not to be frogmarched to a cubical for strip search infront of all the pax.
At one of our outposts we watched a Fueler being frisked WHILE he was refueling an aircraft.

[GotTheTshirt]

As a frequent traveller I can appreciate the frustrations expressed.
Foir those who say "shut up it all for security" really do not not understand reality.
First of all the shoe guy was a total travesty that only needed half a system to be stopped but didnt.
The biggest mistake is trying to relate this guy to real terrorists.
They are not stupid - look at the technicalities of the Locherbie device to see how technically competent these people are.

You have to realise that after Sept the US govenment HAD to do something so they formed the TSA with $4billion to spend.
How do you show Joe Public his tax dollars at work ??
How have a row of hi tech machines and a whole crowd of people in uniforms and long lines of people seeing people get stripped and searched - boy this is impressive !
The TSA did not automatically take any of the original security people ( and they were not all morons!) but they recruited all new people. How ? an advert on the Internet and an instant exam ? I have 2 friends who did the exam and passed. The critical thing about the questions and exam is that the rating starts with military service, anyone with 20 years in the Military ( even as a cook !) is a cert.

How is it that the US is the only place you have to take a laptop not only out of your brief case but out of is own case. Is it US technology or back to the visibility.

The biggest weapon against this is profiling but that can't be used. If someone was serious about preventing hijacking this should be one of the procedure but no we can't do that yet we can take passenger number 5 because the computer picks it even if it is a 80 year old grannie in a zimmer frame.

The shoe scene of course is commonplace but I went out of the States last week and set the bells off so had to sit and the guy rand the wand all over me and of course the shoes set it off. So remove the shoes and sit while it goes through the machine. All finished got dressed and on to the gate. There I got the lucky number and had the gate search and again the shoes triggered the wand so off with the shoes. I thought this will take a while as the Xray machine was back in the terminal. But no he turned the shoes over and looked at them then gave them back ! Of course he could have had xray vision so perhaps I misjudged the system


Travelling a couple of days after Set 11 they brought the meal tray with a note on it saying that the knife had been replaced with a plastic one for security reasons. I opened the wrapper and sure enough the knife had been replaced with plastic one - but the metal fork was still there to which the little old lady sitting next to me held it up and said "you could sure do lot of damage with this "!! This is still the situation today

Finally, a newspaper joke just after the guy started all the shoe searches, showed a line of people lining up at an airport metal detector all naked and someone saying " Well who told them about exploding underwear "!!

[Tartan Giant]

I have read all the replies to date, and I am not at all happy that Flight Crew are targeted in such a mindless, senseless, manner for security purposes.

I applaud SOP's stand for his Purser - well done, and a welcome ray of sanity amongst the worst efforts in the name of security.

May I ask those who depart from the UK, perhaps from the two largest London airports, what they think of this formulation if, challenged

1. Seek the Senior Security Manager and ask for a private Interview

2. Have the security person who asked you to remove your shoes to be present

3. Ask the Senior Security Manager to summon the Police, as his subordinate ("the security person") obviously holds grave doubts as to your persona and intentions during flight

3. Ask the Senior Security Manager to take notes and register the answers to some questions you are about to ask of the security person

4. Ask the security person on what grounds does he suspect you are a terrorist - as your ID and licence are obviously fakes; as is the relationship with your crew who had been watching

5. Ask the security person if he is finished with his resume of how he arrived at the point where he asked for your shoes to be removed and is he still under the firm belief you are a terrorist and hiding a lethal weapon

6. Make them BOTH aware that you are not satisfied with the security persons summations, reasons, and presentation of evidence which would cause any other reasonable security person to be so far advanced with his suspicions as to ask for your shoes to be removed

7. Ask the Senior Security Manager if he also believes you are a terrorist......if yes.......ask the same questions as in para 4.

8. Ask the Policeman if he too believes you are a terrorist..........if yes ........................ask the same questions as in para 4.

9. If the overwhelming odds suggest the removal of shoes is the only way to prevent a late departure of your flight, then remove them, under protest as before..............and given that this simple act proved nothing was hidden in or about the shoes, make them note the point and ask for a copy of the Senior Security Manager's written evidence.

10. Tell them ALL you are reporting this incident, noting their names/staff numbers/ and time of interview

11. If the Police are present (take numbers) ask them to take notes too, as you will be bringing a PRIVATE PROSECUTION against the security man who has overstepped his authority and has falsely (as proved) and without just or reasonable cause, invaded and trespassed your Human Rights and the policeman's evidence will be used in furtherance of this PRIVATE PROSECUTION

12. Depart from the interview.......smile on face...........depart on time if you can .....................sue the silly b@stards on return !!!


I'm no lawyer but Article 17 would suggest there is no just cause to excede Statutory Law such as stripping off for the benefit of a random check.

Article 17 – Prohibition of abuse of rights
Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention.

Article 5 – Right to liberty and security
Would suggest, "Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person" and I would take that as remaining clothed under reasonable conditions of a security search.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for tight security and stopping those who would try to simulate a BA Captain (is that possible ...ha ha) but I am not in favour of random strip security checks that degrade the entire purpose.

As has been pointed out, should the pilot/s wish to inflict fatal force, taking the security check to the naked extreme would not prove the system worked.

A sensible, logical security search of Flight crew is fine, turning it into a circus is plain stupid.

TG

[boofhead]

I think you will find that you give up all your rights when you go onto airport property. If you don't like it, don't enter.

We hate what is happening to us, but we must comply with the stupidity since we make our living from it all. If we are charged with a crime (Disrespecting the security bighead for example) we lose our jobs, so like it or lump it we must accept the whole thing. But passengers do not, and unfortunately too many passengers have opted out of the system and do not fly any longer. Thus the problems the airlines (and therefore us) are now in.

The big push for enhanced security, especially in the US, is for show only. Anyone who knows how the system works will appreciate that criminals are much smarter and can easily modify their procedures to avoid being stopped or caught. But Joe Sixpack does not know that, and he trusts his government to protect him. What he does not like is the delays, hassles and inconveniences the enhanced security presents, and he is finding it quicker to drive, or simpler not to go at all. In California for example, flying is down but travel by road is way up, showing that people are still going on vacation, or visiting grandma etc, but they are avoiding airplanes.

As well as the hassles, the enhanced security seems to say that flying is dangerous. If the government feels it necessary to search the ex-vice president of the United States, or your grandmother, or your 5 year old daughter, then there must be a definite risk. Better not to be exposed to that risk!

Yet on a day-to-day basis, Sep 11 was an aberration, and the big dangers in flying are still pilot error. The chances of being hijacked are so small as to be totally insignificant, as is the danger of a checked in bag going boom. I read that in the US some 98,000 people die every year because of medical errors, yet doctors don't have to take off their shoes before operating.

Enhanced security was needed, for sure, but this in-your-face stupidity is totally counter-productive and every one of us should be calling for a change.

[icemanalgeria]

I think we all agree that something had to be done after 911, But it seems no thought has gone into what should have been done.

In stead the situation is worse.

Examples.

MIA - for a flight in bound to MIA with a one hour turnaround with the same crew, We must shut everything down, Complete immigration forms and go through customs with all our bags.

But we don't want to enter the USA we just want a quick turnaround.

This system means more people are going from the terminal,diluting the efforts of their security systems.

And even worse, Our aircraft is left without our own staff on board to protect against attack. (it's more likely that a person not flying on board would plant a bomb rather that ground staff who will not be flying with us).

Then there are the Armed flightdeck doors, Very secure and locked.

What happens if we have pilot incapacitation during takeoff climb or descent landing. The doors locked and no one can gain entry.

Then there is the fact that our wife's son's etc can not fly on our flight deck, Even though we have known them for years, However the DOT want us to allow a complete stranger form the CAA to be able to join us on the flight deck just because he has an ID, Which maybe false.

Well he has a big shock coming if he attempt's to take a ride on my flight.

Because unless he can convince me that it a safer option taking him than taking my wife he's off.

If we all kick them off then maybe they will come to there senses and allow us to decide who we carry on the flight deck and not them.

[Otterman]

my two cents

I hope we are going through a transition phase at the moment. In the States they are talking about pre-clearance for frequent fliers. I hope that we as aircrew (at least cockpit crew) can become part of this system. I believe it undermines the confidence of our passengers when they see the bloke, who will shortly be flying them a third of the way across the world, being treated as a suspect by security. IF the TSA feels we are an imminent threat I would like to see the aircrew being processed out of view from the passengers. At a number of airports in Europe this is already the case. One item that is on my list; the licenses that we all carry. Don’t know about the USA anymore, but the JAA version has no security features (not even a picture). Combining this with some sort of biometric check could add a more substantial layer and speed up the process.

There will always be holes in any system that we can think of, the criminals will find them if it is their intend. At my airline we are having huge problems with passengers from certain regions transporting drug internally. Usually by swallowing, but I was amazed to see a sample of what a female passenger had stuffed inside her private parts, just as an example.

The passengers have to be made aware that he/she has a central role to play in these scenarios. The numbers will always be in the favor of the passengers/crew when compared to the number of terrorists. It is the final line of defense if needed. Now I feel that the governments and the industry are trying to put almost all the emphasis on the procedures happening on the ground. But we need to be more forthright and get across to the paying public that they do carry a direct responsibility for their own safety while they are in our care. There is an old saying: “First time shame on You, second time shame on Me”. If there is a repeat of 09-11 it is not only the industry that missed some lessons, but also the paying public who failed in its duty to itself.

In the meantime I will sit in my fortress up front, having my food and drink handed to me like I am Hannibal Lector, wishing for some common sense to return. Santa please! It is the only thing on my list this year.

Regards, O.

[BYlady]

As a cabin crew member employed by a well known charter airline, we were recently going through security at SFB where all crew members had to take off their shoes and place them on to the X-ray machine (11 crew in total). Standing behind us waiting to go through security were 328 of our passengers - amazingly none of them had to take off their shoes (no matter what they were wearing). I don't find taking my shoes off a problem, but surely things should be standardised across the board - passengers should be subjected to the same security measures as what crew are. What sort of impression is this giving to our SLF when all the crew are heavily checked and monitored, and they can just "breeze" through?

[whatshouldiuse]

Otterman..I'm puzzled

First of all, people in Phoenix were routinely asked to remove their boots prior to September11th. however, when you state that:

"If there is a repeat of 09-11 it is not only the industry that missed some lessons, but the paying public who failed in its duty to itself".


What exactly does that mean as I live in New York?

Don't pass the blame which is an easy thing to do. All the people around here want to know is when it willl be quciker to take a plane as opposed to a train? Maybe you could help with that answer. Or did i fail my duty that day?

All I know is I saw the 2nd plane come into the tower...(everybody in NY thought the 1st towwer had caught fire) and then I puked. Sorry for the graphic description, but at that point. i knew reality had struck.

Still not sure what "the paying public who failed in its duty to itself"means but I'm sure you do.


Andy

[Otterman]

Whatshouldiuse:

The rules changed on 09-11. We as an industry had not taken a proper account that there is a group of people who are willing to kill themselves, and murder uncounted thousands in order to proof some vague point, using an airplane as a weapon. Passengers have to realize that when a similar situation occurs, the rules have changed. It is not a matter of the hijackings of the 70’s. These lasted a number of days, got lots of press, and the world moved on. Now the airplane has become the weapon. Passengers have a direct responsibility for their own lives. They and the crew are the last line of defense. I would like to see passengers at least give some thought about this, and what they are willing to do if they are ever confronted with a hijacking. No criticism is implied pre 09-11. But putting all the emphasis on the government and industry, without some self-reflection is not the way to go.