Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
PIT Wants Terminal Open To Non-Tkt Holding Public  
User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5613 posts, RR: 51
Posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3439 times:

If this passes...welcome back to the good old days!!!
Thank f*n god!

'Airport wants airside terminal, mall open to public'

Saturday, November 01, 2003
By Mark Belko, Post-Gazette Staff Writer

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the public has been barred from the boarding
terminal at Pittsburgh International Airport, unable to greet or send off loved ones at
the gate, and prohibited from shopping at the award-winning collection of shops
and restaurants.

Now Allegheny County Airport Authority Executive Director Kent George is appealing
to local congressmen and Pennsylvania's two U.S. senators for help in lifting the
ban, which prevents people without tickets from going beyond the airport's security
checkpoint.

George said he is taking his case directly to elected officials because of growing
frustration over the lack of a response from the U.S. Transportation Security
Administration, which oversees security at the nation's airports.

George is pitching a pilot program that would allow people without tickets to visit the
boarding terminal, known as the Airside Building, during nonpeak times.

They would continue to be barred during the airport's heaviest travel periods.
Visitors would have to undergo the same security screening as ticketed
passengers.

"What we're talking about doing is opening up during nonpeak times the security
checkpoint and more fully utilize the checkpoint," he said. "If a line occurs, we will
immediately stop [permitting nonpassengers through] and wait until the lines are
taken care of."

George said that during a recent teleconference with airport operators, the TSA
indicated that it had no plans to lift restrictions preventing nonticketed visitors from
going beyond the security checkpoint, citing the loss of 6,000 security screener jobs
since spring.

TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said yesterday the agency will give the authority's
request -- and any forthcoming from congressmen -- a "fair look" but pointed out the
TSA is working with fewer screeners.

"Our core mission is passenger screening. With the limited amount of resources,
we have to address that first. We don't have the additional capacity at Pittsburgh or
elsewhere to extend screening to nonticketed passengers," he said.

Hatfield said the TSA has fielded requests from other congressmen seeking to lift
restrictions at other airports but has not changed the policy so far.

George would like to have the restrictions lifted before the approaching holiday
season. Not only would that enable family and friends to greet or send off
passengers, he said, it would be a boost for Airmall merchants, who have lost
business because of the drop off in travel following Sept. 11 and cutbacks by US
Airways, the airport's dominant carrier.

"The decision is going to be based on our core mission, balanced with the available
resources," Hatfield responded. "It's not going to be linked to a calendar or a
holiday."

George sent the letter to U.S. Reps. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair; Melissa Hart,
R-Bradford Woods; Bill Shuster, R-Blair; Mike Doyle, D-Swissvale; and John Murtha,
D-Johnstown; and U.S. Sens. Arlen Specter and Rick Santorum.



Don't shoot the messenger!
BN747


"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3403 times:

Good for PIT! At least somebody in the aviation world realizes the benefits of non-ticketed passengers to an airport's bottom line.

Like I've said before, allowing non-ticketed passengers into the terminals is NOT a security issue. It is simply a passenger-flow issue. If PIT can handle non-ticketed passengers while simultaneously maintaining post-9/11 security procedures, then more power to them!

Aaron G.


User currently offlineDlx737200 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1902 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3391 times:

Personally... and this is my opinion.... I have mixed emotions on this:

Pros:

-Greeting and Sending Off Family/Friends
-Spotters can see planes up close again without flying
-I can spend more time at the airport
-It'd be like the old days
-Show terrorists that we can move on and that they haven't affected us as much as they think they have.
-More business to shops and businesses that are past the security checkpoint

Cons:

-Less attention to Real Passengers flying that day
-More crowded lines
-Better chance for a Terrorist making it through
-TSA would become more lax

This is all I could come up with. Again these are just my opinions. Overall, I wish they would pass this. I REALLY MISS getting to go down to the gates here in Orlando. I use to do it every other weekend and look at planes. Now, like everyone else, I only go down there when I'm flying.  Sad

I Pray to God that they pass this but also pray that if they do, nothing bad will become of it! Amen.  Smile

-Justin


User currently offlineRockyRacoon From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 961 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3347 times:

God I hope they lift those restrictions, that'll be the day!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy For PIT I would think it wouldn't be such a problem, since they only have one checkpoint in the entire airport. Hell, they could make a seperate line for non ticketed passengers and close it when they didnt' have the man power or if it was a security issue.

Tim


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3316 times:

I don't think it's going to happen nor do I want it to happen.

As much as I loved just spending a day at the airport and watch planes, the fact remains is the rest of the world does not allow non-ticketted passengers past security, and for good reason.

Why overcrowd the airport for nothing? I understand Pittsburgh has a very special duty free area and that's great. But the fact is it's an airport. It's a place for people to catch flights.

I know we aviation buffs love watching planes and allowing non-ticketted passengers would make us all happy, but we have to be reasonable.

Less crowded airports mean it is easier to catch potential troublemakers or terrorists.

The rest of the world has ONLY allowed ticketed passengers passed security. It's about time the US followed.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineElectraBob From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 931 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

Unfortunately, I don't see this happening at PIT or any other U.S. airport as long as the security threat condition remains at YELLOW (elevated). If the condition is some day lowered to BLUE (guarded), then maybe we can all get our hopes up. That's just my opinion.

I would love to be able to take a walk through the gate area of the new McNamara terminal at DTW. I was inside the terminal just this past Wednesday afternoon and the security check points had no one, and I mean no one in line. I'm just wondering that if the gate areas are some day opened to non ticketed passengers, how much input each individual airline would have in determining what is "peak" and "off peak." I'm sure each airline would have a different say on this matter.



Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.....
User currently offlineExpressjetphx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3304 times:

I say do this for all airports, but open a single metal detector/x-ray only for non-ticketed passengers so that the line for ticketed passengers doesnt slow down.

User currently offlineCrosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3273 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Doesn't happen anywhere else in the world, and should never happen in the USA again.

"Officials" in Pittsburgh appear to place commercial issues above security issues, and most of the respondents to this thread appear to take the same line.

On thing to think about which is maybe not such an issue in Pittsburgh, but could be in other US cities. Most International airlines audit all their stations, and one thing they will pay careful attention to is the security of their aircraft. They may take exception to the increased risk caused by having extra non-travelling passengers in the concoursces where they could possibly gain access to their aircraft. And these companies have more influence with airport authorities than spotters who want to be able to "see planes up close again without flying"

While to the USA the current situation is "abnormal" to everyone else it's a basic security measure.


User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3219 times:

Why don't we solve all of these so-called "security risks" once and for all by simply grounding ALL planes permanently, and reverting back to trains and covered wagons?

Give me a friggin' break.  Insane

I support this proposition 200%. It worked fine before. It could be worked out just fine now, there are numerous possbilities ranging from having separate lines to charging small "cover charges".

Just because the rest of the world "does it", doesn't mean that we have to.


User currently offlineMidway2airtran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3181 times:

It's good to know that somebody is at least looking at the option of opening gate areas back to the public. It seems like things are getting a little more streamlined at the checkpoints at many airports and I could see it working out. It would definitely be a boost to the merchants and airport authorities that take in some of those sales too. Another good thing is that checkpoints might run a little better when you take out the line doing boarding pass/ID checks. Of course the risks should be considered too and it might work better to experiment with different airports to see the results.


"Life is short, but your delay in ATL is not."
User currently offlineBistro1200 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 337 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3160 times:

This kind of thinking is what one would call 'complacency'. You can assess the value of this by asking one question: Does this policy make it easier for banned items to get into sterile areas? Yes.

Other than airline and airport staff, there is simply no NEED for non passengers to be in the airport. It is not a mall, it is not a club, or an entertainment complex. Terrorists will use any weakness in the system to penetrate our defenses. Creating new weaknesses is not going to help anyone. How? Their names will not be verified against the FBI do-not-fly list, nor can they be profiled before crossing into the sterile airside of the airport.

BTW, I am a certified member of the AAAE.



Measure to the millimeter, mark with a crayon, cut with an axe.
User currently offlineCrosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3138 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It worked fine before

Is this the same airline security system that allowed the September 11th terrorists onto aircraft?
Yes, let's go back to that system. While those involved were passengers, they were allowed through a security system that was all about maximising passenger throughput at security checkpoints with the minimum checks and hassle for passengers. They had to handle a large volume of people who had no real reson to go airside, and try not to cause delays to passengers who had flights to catch.

Security is about minimising risks. That means you allow only those who have to go through security through, and with thorough checks.

For what good reason does anyone not flying need airside access?

You want to meet or say goodbye to someone?
Do it in the checkin hall/arrival hall

You wan to eat/shop?
If you're travelling do it at the airport because that's what the facilities are for, if you're not travelling there are thousands of businesses accross the country not located in secure areas that will be happy to accept your business.

Checkpoints might run a little better when you take out the line doing boarding pass/ID checks

Great! Let's remove another layer of security protection.


User currently offlineNtspelich From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 764 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3117 times:

For what good reason does anyone not flying need airside access?

You want to meet or say goodbye to someone?
Do it in the checkin hall/arrival hall


At PIT it's purely a financial one. The SkyMall isn't doing too well since access to it has been restricted to airport employees and passengers. And, since it's pretty much PIT's claim to fame they want to try to keep it alive.

Really, I think that there was a separate security lane it wouldn't be a big deal. Going through security is going through security. Why don't we start screening cargo, because I think the US has proven that it is capable of adequately screening people, despite the very public slip-throughs.


NS



United 717 heavy, you're facing the wrong way. Any chance you can powerback to get off of my deice pad?
User currently offline767Lover From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3093 times:

I have mixed feelings on this -- not for security reasons but for traffic flow. in ATL during peak times, the security checkpoint is backed up a pretty long way as it is. Add one or two extra people per passenger to the flow and...jeez, I can't imagine how long the line and wait would be. And now we're entering cold weather and holiday season, which delays security checks even further because everyone has to remove their coats, people carry gifts, etc.

So, while I LOVE hanging out at the airport and watching the planes and people, I would absolutely hate being a traveler in this scenario.


User currently offlineGoboeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2682 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3055 times:

It's about time they start doing stuff like this. I don't really care about whatever security measures the TSA might do to make the flying public feel safer. They can put whoever they want under the illusion that everything they do is truly safer, but I'm tired of having things taken away "in the name of safety." If you're so concerned that you think your flight is going to be hijacked, bombed, etc. by a terrorist after what has already happened, then I'm not sure you deserve to sit on the plane. Take a chance.

Nick


User currently offlineIflewrepublic From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 537 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3055 times:

Just my two cents worth...

As a crewmember, I appreciate the fact that not every whack-o can get right up to the jet way at the airports. Of course, I do know that anyone who wants to sabotage an airliner will do it no matter what.

As a member of the flying public, I enjoy not having every sentimental family member in the boarding area. Leaving the aircraft always took forever when family members had to be standing right in the jetway door waiting for their loved ones.

My opinion...Leave everything the way that it is.

Iflewrepublic



Aviation is proof that, given the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6383 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3009 times:

Is this the same airline security system that allowed the September 11th terrorists onto aircraft?
Yes, let's go back to that system. While those involved were passengers, they were allowed through a security system that was all about maximising passenger throughput at security checkpoints with the minimum checks and hassle for passengers. They had to handle a large volume of people who had no real reson to go airside, and try not to cause delays to passengers who had flights to catch.


HA!!!!! I GOT YOU THERE!!!!!!

Non pax were not allowed thru BOS security BEFORE 9-11. Same for UA concousre at EWR. Only at IAD for AA.

So, 3 of the 4 hijacked planes had NO extra large volume of non-pax. You just blew that argument!  Insane



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8202 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2993 times:

It will never happen. At least not in the foreseeable future. I know this is hard to envision, but airports will have to change and adapt, even if it means rebuilding.

User currently offlineCospn From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2968 times:

Airports are Airports...

Shopping malls are for the public..for that reason..TSA has no business wasting their time to screen non-PAX..



User currently offlineJcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 39
Reply 19, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2939 times:

Unless PIT checks IDs against boarding passes at the gate, I would not feel safe if this was to happen.


America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2915 times:

Instead of having one giant airport screening area, they should have individual screening areas at each of the gates. For example, have a screening area at gate A-1, and one at A-2, and so on. The waiting area to board the flight would be screened, and then have screening times coincide with boarding times.

User currently offlineCs03 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 413 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2889 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As Cospn remarks that TSA people would waste their time with non PAX in the terminals, guess who would pay for that, so that airports like PIT could make more money? WE Would pay for it! How fair is that?

User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Reply 22, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2879 times:

How fair is that?

I know this is not really related to the topic at hand, but the example will illustrate my point:

Do you think it's fair that a large chunk of your tax $$$ goes to pay for multi-generational Welfare recipients who have never worked a day in their life?

Why should YOU have to pay for THEM?

Yet we do it, and few seem to mind-or at least bother to say anything about it.

[Edited 2003-11-02 05:06:15]

User currently offlineDeltaffindfw From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2834 times:

I seriously doubt that any government program catered to helping down and out citizens can be compared to spending extra money so a soccer mom can shop at the local PIT Sharper Image or so mom and dad can hold a sign up welcoming junior home at the gate instead of at baggage claim.

You are comparing apples to oranges!

[Edited 2003-11-02 06:08:43]

User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 24, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2781 times:

How about the U.S. government levies a 300% tax on all airfares, effective immediately? That'll thin out the crowds at airports even more, and make it even easier for us to catch the terrorists!

Gosh, talk about complacency! If we're relying on less people in the airports to catch potential terrorists, then I shudder to think how the TSA handles actual security procedures (which, contrary to popular belief, are what really prevent terrorist incidents).

Again, this is not a depth-of-security issue. This is a TRAFFIC FLOW issue. I obviously don't think non-ticketed pax should be allowed back in the airports, effective tomorrow. I believe that if an airport has stringent security measures AND can handle the volume, then there is no reason why non-ticketed people should be barred from the inside of the terminal. It's good for the airport, it's good for the traveler!

Aaron G.


25 J_hallgren : The issue of this topic was NOT allowing non-pax at ALL airports, just PIT! And is due strictly to the particular structure/layout of THAT facility, w
26 L-188 : I hope PIT the best of luck, but knowing the arrogent A-holes running TSA, I doubt anything will happen. Isn't it amazing, with a better trained and p
27 Ssides : This won't happen, nor should it. Many airports are doing just fine with only passengers behind the security checkpoints. DFW, DCA, IAH, AUS, and many
28 BR715-A1-30 : Kent George you're my Heeero. FINALLY, An Airport Executive with sense. Maybe he is doing it for us spotters but uses the shopping mall as an excuse.
29 Frntman : As others have indicated in earlier posts, this whole issue is about $$$$$$. The Airmall and other merchants aren't doing too well, so they need to ge
30 Bwc1976 : When I was visiting Australia in July 2002, non-passengers were allowed airside. I seem to remember hearing they only just changed this in the last fe
31 Dsuairptman : This is outstanding news!!! Many thanks to those at PIT trying to make this reality. Its about time someone steped in to take care of this problem tha
32 FlyPNS1 : Why do people in PIT need to go to the airport to go shopping? Don't they have malls in Pittsburgh? The only reason PIT needs this is because US has p
33 Flairport : I think it should go back to being up to the airport. LGA, BOS, and parts of EWR (along with a few others, probably) did NOT allow people throuh secur
34 Jjbiv : Let non-pax pay the $2.50 AY fee and go through the checkpoint. That should make everyone happy. joe
35 Bistro1200 : Thanx Jjbiv. I was about to recommend that non-pax pay the PFC ($3 or $4), and upon first pirchase the shop can pay for it instead. Or, have the shops
36 Ntspelich : However, I am willing to bet that many airlines want to open their clubs up to those not flying, which would add value to those facilities They alread
37 Flyinghighboy : Let's have a look, all the terroists that have passed through security, hmm wait they are pax that have tickets. Kinda defeats the purpose of all this
38 Flairport : just wat to clairfy: according to the TSA: Access is limited to: Passengers with: Boarding Pass Ticket Ticket confirmation Persons with parental, offi
39 Ouboy79 : People are taking this the wrong way. This is about PIT...could it be other airports? Sure. Here is how I see it... All non-pax into the airside termi
40 Garnetpalmetto : I think that's quite possible, Ouboy, considering PIT's layout. Place the "admission" tickets into the entrance to the Core, then limit access to the
41 Airlinelover : I definately think the pros outweigh the cons in this matter.. I didn't see this one.. PRO- Every person is an extra pair of eyes in case something od
42 Phatfarmlines : An airport (or airline) can block all the non-ticketed passengers it wants, however, Mr. Evil Intentions will still get through with a paid ticket. It
43 High_flyr69 : Gidday to all, well if yer all want to be able to wonder freely amongst the terminals and not be restricted in where you can roam well come on down to
44 Jhooper : The next step would be to setup seperate security lines for non-pax (unless it is REALLY slow). The question is, what about the costs? Easy. Setup kio
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
PIT To Open For Non-pax posted Tue Apr 13 2004 00:00:53 by Qqflyboy
Spirit Of Delta Retirement Open To ATL Public posted Mon May 1 2006 01:34:03 by DeltaGuy
Is The Delta Museum Open To The Public? posted Sun Oct 16 2005 19:44:42 by DeltaL1011man
Going To DFW Is Terminal D Open? posted Mon Jul 11 2005 20:22:49 by AA777-200
New Boston Terminal Set To Open posted Wed Mar 9 2005 17:53:01 by Padcrasher
New DFW Terminal Set To Open In 05! posted Wed Mar 2 2005 03:13:55 by Aa777jr
SEA Concourse A Open To Public 6/12 posted Wed Jun 9 2004 22:41:06 by Erikr
Concorde Open To Public April posted Sun Feb 15 2004 19:31:19 by VC10BOAC
When Is The New Tel Aviv Terminal Due To Open? posted Tue Nov 25 2003 00:32:34 by Delta777Jet
Concorde Open To Public Rumour At LHR posted Mon Oct 6 2003 22:29:59 by EZYAirbus