Because the BAA and the people at the DfT who supervise their security operations are a complete bunch of idiots who don't have the first idea what they are doing.

UNB5
 

Judging by the responses so far (some more responsible than others), this DfT 'initiative' is seen for what it is: an ill-thought and ill-conceived idea which is completely unworkable.

It smacks of vindictiveness disguised as the DfT doing its bit to ensure we are safe from ourselves.

It's really up to our respective managers to get this new ruling consigned to the bin where it belongs or, at least, to apply the policy only to those who would cheat the system.

Can you see anyone standing up to the DfT?

I've still yet to see any firm evidence of why liquids are seen as the only way to cause an explosion onboard an aircraft. It's absolutely ludicrous.

Clearly Class 4 DG do not exist and in no way can solids possibly be flammable, oh and of course there are absolutely no solid oxidising agents either.

The whole "security" system is farcical, and the liquid ban is just indicative of the lunatics who are running the whole fiasco.

Wouldn't happen at my airline, we have slightly more responsible folks in the CC ranks.
IE; They do what they are told, or are dismissed accordingly.

Simple as that.

And, yes, if I don't like their performance, the CC manager sends 'em a don't come Monday letter, pronto.
At an outstation?
They are dismissed promptly, and can find their own way home.

Therefore, they comply with the rules in force.

Case closed.

As usual the security dept are looking in the rear view mirror instead of the windscreen.
Liquids are a threat of the past. Im sure the bad guys are one step ahead by now and would not even bother with another liquid based threat.

411A
 

Wouldn't happen at my airline, we have slightly more responsible folks in the CC ranks.
IE; They do what they are told, or are dismissed accordingly.


What a lovely, perfect world you live in. Must be wonderful.

btw does 411A relate to the Cessna light twin I used to fly about 30 years ago? (See, I CAN rise to the bait.)

In continental Europe, the liquid restrictions are in place for pax, but crew do not need to pull out all their liquids from their cabin and/or hold bags. I feel very sorry for my colleagues that operate out of the UK.

Does this apply to deadheading crewmembers?

Yup, I've owned one for twelve years as my personal aeroplane, and delivered several directly from the factory many years ago.
A fine aeroplane, IF flown properly.

Next question?:hmm:

OK I'll make my point again - many of us operating out of LHR lost any option to repack liquids into hold baggage several years ago - when this liquids farce first kicked off. Crews checked in their hold baggage well before their handbaggage was screened and we never, ever had the option to repack after handbaggage screening.....so if you accidently had a greater than 100ml container in your carry on baggage then it was confiscated...:bored:

If the original post is to be believed all that seems to be happening here is TranSec/Dft are forcing some airline's crews, rightly or wrongly, to fall into line with procedures already in place on parts of the Airport ( at least LHR).

I'm not saying I agree with the current farce over crew and liquids, I think it ****s for the short Haul Boys and Girls, but sorry, I don't see what all the shock and horror is about.

Precisely.

The DFT would get absolutely hammered if they ignored this threat!!!

Once got a jar of marmalade refused, had to take it back to my car, otherwise I learn to live with it.

gtf
 

"Not flying out of LHR much, so wondering whether the ban is actually enforced there ?"

To be safe leaving fortress UK assume it always applies to everybody, be it passengers, operating crews and deadheading crews and irrespective of wether you use a passenger or staff screening facility....

...and now to the lighter side
 

Scene: LHR post 24, Captain comes with his brand new Taylor Made Driver...

Floor level security man 1 (FLSM 1) - "Wonderfull driver, sir...you cannot take it through here"

Captain (C): "It is going in the hold"

FLSM 1 : "No can do, sir. You have to bring a station person out here to take it to the hold"

C: "You trust the apprentice check-in girl more than me??"

FLSM 1: " Rules!"

C: "Are there any competent security person present here who can quote me the rules on this??"

DEAD SILENCE.....

Floor level security woman 1 (FLSW1): "Don´t be so difficult. Give it up volontarely"

C: "Are you the competent person I was asking for just now? You want to confiscate my club....that´s not volontarily"

FLSW 1 : talking in her walkie-talkie : " Control 1...Control 1 ...immidiate response....we have a situation....."

Captain calls station on mobile, but being understaffed, the station guys cannot retrieve the club until after departure of the flight.

C:" OK, the station will pick the driver up later. Can you please give me a receit..."

FLSW 1 : " You cannot get a receit as you have turned it in volontarely!"

C: "Did I ask for your opinion?? Now I ask you colleques if sporting equipment is allowed as part of crew baggage in hold...IS IT????"

FLSM 2 + 3: "Yes, sir, but it has to be in a bag!"

C: "So 14 lethal clubs are OK if in a bag...1 driver is not??????"

FLSM 1 + 2 + 3 : "That´s right, sir".

At this point captain unzips his big crew suitcase and puts the driver inside with the handle sticking out.

C: "OK guys, problem solved, have a good day..."

FLSM 1: "OH NO...you cannot do that! It is not a golf bag!!!"

C: "Are you the competent person on the rules, or do you just work here?"

FLSW 1 : "Control 1....Control 1 ......We need supervisor backup immidiately!!!! "

Control 1 (on walkie-talkie): "Post 24, he cannot be there until in 30 minutes"

FLSW 1: " You will get a delay out of this, and you are blocking the post"

C: " We have a delay code for crew security harassment and undue delay, and this crew is not moving until all legal crews baggage has been processed!!!!!"

4 pilots + 13 C/A smiling patiently at the FLSM/Ws, who are now appearing quite uneasy.

And then the Upper Level Security Supervisor (ULSS) appears, tweed, moustace and healthy outdoor type (clearly a british golfer).

ULSS: Yes, sir....sporting equipment is allowed. Yes, even one piece. No, sir...the suitcase is not a suitable container. Well, strictly speaking - you are right -it does not need a container....But you could sneak it up in the cockpit...No, sir..I cannot carry...OH, WELL...I will bring it to the aircraft and see it safely on board.....

All faces saved, my Taylor Made made the 12 hour trip on time and the FLSM/W greet me very politely when we meet at post 24.

So now I need to take this fantastic putter.............:D

Did you ever consider not re-electing them?

Is toothpaste or hairgel safe to have around the house? I'm concerned that if BAA feel that any more than 100ml presents a threat greater than a berserk pilot in charge of a 400tonne 747 then I will keep my supplies under lock and key.

Presumably, there have been a number of attacks involving half used tubes of ******* ( brand sensitive)toothpaste or other dental polish. Surely hallitosis on the flightdeck is a bigger killer?

I have set my 11year old son on mixing toothpaste and other liquids that I would be likley to take on a trip ( safely, at a distanace in the shed) to see if he can concoct anything even mildly explosive.

In fairness to BAA their concern must be that a crew member will smuggle equipment on board to assist a terrorist! Surely if you helping someone blow you out of the sky you would just do the job properly from the front seat ?

It can't be the containers because you can buy what you like airside so is it just another ruse to assist flagging BAA airside sales - never! Apparently T5 airside retail sales are almost half what they should be - now there is a surprise!

Often! The lunatics really are running the asylum at the moment.

Not all of us flying in and out of UK are UK crew. I pack my liquids in my overnight bag and bring everything through crew security. It's then placed in the hold. I try not to get a heart attack before I get to the aircraft, so this is what I do.

If one of the hosties violate this procedure, are they going to confiscate my foreign ID? If not, what will be the consequence? Pilota non grata in UK?

I'm not going to defend this new and slightly stricter procedure, but I recently sat for 15 minutes in the crew transport waiting for the crew ahead of us to clear security. A lot of repacking going on.

What kind of liquids are you guys bringing in your pilots bags?

Manchester cargo apron entrance, this week:
Seen written in large black letters on the back of a female security staffs dayglo jacket;

"PIT BULL"

Am I losing my perspective / sense of humour or...........????
lsh

Was that with or without the lipstick?

When your deodorant spray/shampoo/conditioner is about empty, take it to work in your flight bag. Send it through the scanner. Those wonderful guards get a buzz from removing it, telling you off, and forcefully throwing it into their bin; you save the bother of recycling or disposing of said item. Works a treat at MAN. And EMA. And CWL. Actually at most places. Everyone's happy! And keeps "security" on their toes.

411A
 

Yup, I've owned one for twelve years as my personal aeroplane, and delivered several directly from the factory many years ago.
A fine aeroplane, IF flown properly.

Next question?http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/yeees.gif



And, presumably, in your perfect world YOU fly it properly.

The next question is the question you continue to duck: why should the Captain of a crew lose his job for the misdemeanours of a cabin-crew member?

A simple analogy: parents of an 18 year-old would be sent to jail if he/she stabs someone?


http://static.pprune.org/images/stat...er_offline.gif http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif

I'll throw my hat into the ring here!!

Firstly I'll point out that I'm a budding flyer who has loved avaition from being knee high to a grasshopper and that I work on security (its a complete Marmite job for staff towards us were liked or not liked simple!)

Simple answer is that the UK government is a stickler for following every rule to the letter that Europe imposes and so the DFT come down like a ton of bricks on any AD operator for not following the rules properly and therefore aviation staff get targeted and checked more thoroughly than pax sometimes even thought we have for a lot of our jobs very stringent background checks but then still get treated with mistrust!!

As for the regulations and restrictions a lot of crews, flight deck and ground staff come to work and go through security without hassle no tutting, no causing a scene, not taking it personal and on the whole being very jovial and understanding that it is just another part of their day realizing that security as themselves have a job to do :ok:

On the other hand I've seen crews, flight deck and ground staff acting like five year old kids having temper tantrums and having a whole you are the great unwashed attitude towards security.

I do know also that some security do go on power trips with the little power they have given to them and that its a double edged sword in terms of respect between staff, but personally I've found simple phrase and a good one to stick by is 'treat others how you would like to be treated' it works a treat.

Also I've seen the rules come and go and the liberties slowly being taken away from staff and can full well understand the frustrations of some staff who have been in the industry for donkey's years and have seen a decline in the industry.

I have respect for all staff however low or high powered their job is and I also have a great amount of respect for Pilots as you guys are in a job I would love to be in and with a bit of luck and time hopefully will get to work in the best office in world.

and one final point I'll make is that in this regulation driven aviation world of ours in the UK a lot of the time common sense would like to be used but we're all bound by the rules and don't feel like putting our necks and jobs on the line for one small easily resolvable matter.

bravotangoegcc
 

Interesting view from the other side....................... however the rules set down by the DfT are enacted in a number of ways and what is good for one airport is not for another.

Manchester happens to be the very worst airport in the UK in the way it treats crews, I have quietly walked away from treatment that in any other profession would be classed as sexual abuse or assault, I have had my bags tuned out in front of the crew and passengers in an act that seemed to be some sort of sport for the security staff. The passage of a package that was a birthday present for my wife THREE times past the X-ray and then ripping it open was totally uncalled for (before you ask the items were not my size!) and was harassment of the worst type and the items went in the bin after the being pawed by the so called security operative.

On another passage of MAN security was marked by the insistence that I removed my items of clothing to examine my knee the scale of the clothing removal that was insisted upon was totally out of proportion to the examination requested.

Throughout my career I have tried to treat all staff in a way that I would like to be treated, with respect an common courtesy however I have had enough of the games and stupidity of the security staff at Manchester. I have had enough harassment and abuse from the likes of Manchester security and will take the most robust action that the law permits the next time that I am abused.

If you are doing your job properly you have nothing to fear from me but if one of your workmate steps out of line he or she can expect more (legal) trouble to be visited upon them that they would have ever imagined existed.

A and C
 

I have seen and have heard and even cringed about some of the actions taken of which you speak and have heard we are seen as one of the worst security towards crew in the UK by talking to crews and reading from websites such as this one.

Also I've seen the many different interpretations of the DFT rules too and agree that there isn't enough uniformity regarding the rules.

Its good that you also treat people how you expect to be treated as I've said I've seen many others who don't have this simple common courtesy, but I can't speak about the actions of others (let alone apologise as it would be a hollow one) and am always mindful of the need to do the job correctly.

Apart from that I wish you safe and happy flying (and transit through MAN)

<grin>

You got a problem with pit bulls?

pb

Is it true that for a civil servant to qualify for the security brief at the D of T he has to leave school with no qualifications?:*

Um, no, the UK government has imposed these rules. The restrictions do not apply to crew in Europe.

Cruella De Ville
 

There is a way of dealing with this tomfoolery. Ask to see the risk assessment that underpins all these security/safety measures and then ask to see the 'fit and proper person' qualification from those who put the risk analysis together. Thing is, whilst the airport drongos are fixating on clear plastic bags and shavings of sawdust, they are mssing the planks of wood! Airport security have entirely lost the plot in respect of how terrorists can sabotage an aircraft and, frankly, the greater threat is always airside, not non-airside.:ugh:

Or you could lobby your MP and ask them to attend the BALPA reception in the Commons Dining Room between 4 pm and 6 pm. on Tuesday 5th May on this and other matters.

Don’t know your MP?
UK Parliament

Email sent to MP asking him to attend .................. now if you all sent an email to your MP's maybe we would start getting the message across because the MP's sure don't have the time to read pprune!

Its easy just click on the link on the post by Zeus above.

Everyone appears to concentrate on the incompetence of the "security" droids and the stupid rules.......

Everyone seems to overlook the sheer COST to this country , in having It's most-wired, highest producing ,most commercially savvy business leaders, stood like a bunch of naughty kids , collectively wasting over a hundred hours of their POTENTIAL earning-power, for these farcical "security" charades.


Where the hell are BALPA, the CBI, the FSB and the other trade-bodies and representatives ?

Brown has allowed the *ankers to rape the country's coffers 9after he gave away our gold-reserves).....now he's intent on driving frequent-flyers abroad.

Damned if I'd put up with it. Amazing that someone isn't doing consolidated charters on popular routes and allowing "private parties" to bypass the circus.


Acute loss of revenue might just wake up a few of the rule-influencers.

Emailed my MP asking him to attend the BALPA reception. Any UK crewmember who doesn't do the same really has no grounds to complain about this fiasco. Get organised.

Security
 

I think you have got it right. As an SLF frequent flyer living abroad I long ago gave up landing at a UK airport to then catch a domestic flight to my final destination, as the security hassle from the UK security staff is just too much to stand, especially coming in on an LH flight.
I now ensure I land at a continental hub and make my final connection from there. I will even accept a landing at CDG before a landing at LHR or Stansted

Make your MP work for his sandwiches
 

Just a note - asked my MP to attend on 5th also.
Mass lobbies of voters sometimes has an effect:ok:

Have also faxed/emailed my MP - the more the merrier. This link is useful to write your MP:-

Fax your MP

As a passenger I frequently fly from many UK aiports and don't experience any issues at security. I am fully aware of what the rules are, make sure I comply and get through security in a pleasant manner with no issues whatsover.

This suggests the crews that are having issues aren't complying with the rules in which case they can't complain about security picking up on this as they are only doing their job, or the security staff who work in crew areas are being deliberately difficult which I find hard to believe.

If this is the case people should be complaining to BAA or the relevant airport owner directly. I complained to BAA via their website about security queues when they were a problem last year and received a response so at the very least it might raise more awareness than complaining on here.

Even better ask to speak to the service manager once you've got through security at which point its too late for the security agents to be awkward to you in return :)

Discokid
 

If you are crew you find that all the airports make up different "extra" rules as to what you can and can't do so a crew member can be good for one airport and find that three hours later at another airport in breach on the local "rules".

What we want is a common standard............... no more.

Hello All,

If there are any BALPA pilots from Crawley reading this thread, please invite our MP Mrs L Moffatt. She has informed me that she would be delighted to attend, but as yet, has had no formal invite from BALPA.

Bulbs

Thought for the day

In the same way we all want good experienced pilots to save aircraft with good judgment calls when something happens. (hudson springs to mind)

We also want good experienced security to properly judge what luggage actually causes risks. Going by the checklist blind doesn’t always help.

At the end of the day both pilots, crew and security protect planes and passengers, so shouldn’t we be asking BAA for the experienced security officials.