Cjuniel From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 146 posts, RR: 1 Posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5287 times:
It's been almost three years since the terrorist attacks here in the states. Security lines seem to be getting longer daily. For those of us that fly frequently, do you feel any safer now than you felt in 2001 prior to the attacks?
My personal thoughts.....Security, especially in the busiest airports (Atlanta, Chicago, DFW, LAX, Denver, etc) is a damn joke. Prior to 9/11, I can't recall ever waiting in the security line more than 10 minutes. I have flown through several airports this year, and waited in line for security a MINIMUM of 30 minutes each time. The security personnel seem incompetent for the most part. They are no more skilled than the contract personnel that ran security prior to 9/11. Coming back to DC from LAX a few months ago, they shut down the security lanes for Terminal 7 because they THOUGHT that someone slipped through security. I never felt unsafe flying, but I am biased because it has always been my main mode of transit for trips over 300 miles. The forum's thoughts?
Aa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3350 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5234 times:
I think the United States and to a lesser extent, the world, is safer post-9/11, slightly in part to new security rules but mostly because of the cabin crew and passengers. Any one who tries to hijack a plane in the next 25 years is going to get beaten to a pulp. Why would you not fight? You know these people are out to kill you, so either try to save yourself or have a 100% chance of dying.
Starrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1144 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5230 times:
I'm a very frequent flier who workis in the security business and I can tell you that airport security is an absolute joke. The security checkpoints regularly miss objects, the operators of the systems are often poorly trained and poorly paid. Some airports are using wretchedly kludged-together systems that barely do the minimum.
Example: I took my laptop bag through security at the airports dozens of times, when I went through the US Capitol screening they found a screwdriver wedged at the bottom that the TSA screeners had missed repeatedly. Their opinion of the TSA was pretty damning.
Usatoeze From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 358 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5227 times:
I have a prosthetic leg and I fly a lot both internationally and domestically. I was always disappointed with security in the US before 9/11, because I rarely received a thorough screening. I would just wave my hand and say "I have a prosthetic" and they would wand me for two seconds and let me pass. In Europe I would get a really thorough screening and I always felt much safer because of it. In the US I could have disassembled a gun and shoved it inside the leg before 9/11...now clearly they would find it. I feel much safer, as world security is now up to European standards(Or most European countries I should say).
I also never liked the idea of non-passengers coming to the gates. It made terminal too crowded(Especially DTW Davey and UA at ORD).
FLYtoEGCC From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 947 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5239 times:
Despite the odd smart-arse journalist managing to smuggle a knife through security then trumpeting it on the front pages all the next day - I have to say, since 9/11 I've felt much more safe at any airport I've visited (the one possible exception being REU, where the Ryanair staff didn't even bother checking passports as people boarded, concerned as they were with the obviously more important task of taking off 25 minutes early.)
I don't know if this is because I'm simply more aware of the security after what happened, but to me the procedures seem much more rigorous. Nearly every time I have flown since 9/11, the security staff have had hand held body scanners as well as the normal walk-through ones. I've been stopped loads of times and searched, but I don't mind - it's all in the name of safety and I'm quite happy about it. I don't ever remember being stopped before 9/11.
ScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5180 times:
How about want to bring visitors back into the gate areas or the concourses again. I just don't want any wait for long time after 3 years now. It's time to make reinstates with the visitors back into the concourses. I got very good news to all US Airports will allowed go through into the concourse again and this is not restricted areas either.
Aviaar From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5098 times:
I agree ScottysAir-
We need to let people back into the gate areas. It's nice to pick up a loved one or send them off from this area and watch their plane come in or leave from here. Also, for aviation enthusiasts like us, it's awesome to be close to the planes and stroll the terminal to see all the aircraft.
It would be safe under the security they have now, though time-consuming to get through at the same time.
DeltaAgent1 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 104 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5094 times:
That question brings other questions. Is the security & screening performed on a passenger in Cody WY or Wausau WI, or Kingman AZ, of worse quality or better quality, or same quality as that performed on a passenger in Atlanta or Denver? A passenger going through security at most small airports will not go through screening again, which may include 2 or 3 transfer points. I have gone thorugh some very small DL connection stations and their security equipment in place is "ancient". Is the "sterile" screened passenger who went through screening & security in Cody, as sterile as the passenger who went through screening in Salt Lake City?
BH346 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3265 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5057 times:
I'm no road warrior but I've done a decent amount of flying after 9/11 and I still don't have a TSA horror story. I've had no real problems except for a couple of officious agents. The most I've ever had to wait for security is about 10 or 15 minutes. I feel about as safe as I did before 9/11. To me, customs and immigration procedures don't seem to be that different. I'd like to see some new technology implemented to help speed things up. Invision scanners sound good although I'm no expert on security. In some airports, it is a bit of a pain to check in and then take your luggage clear across the terminal to the scanners.
The big surprise for me is how beefed up security was in Japan. Arriving there wasn't a problem but leaving Kansai was a bit of a hassle. This was surprising to me considering how Japan is known to be efficient. It took about 45 minutes to wait for security. They searched through all of your checked luggage by opening it and looking around with you right there. After that, you were let into the check-in counter. At least the agents were professional about it and did the best job they could as they usually do in Japan. I hear they're still doing this for international departures.
Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
Starrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1144 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5040 times:
The sterile areas in the airports are governed by the same rules, but the level of security is certainly different. Smaller airports have a lower budget for access control and video installation and it shows. There is also a more relaxed attitude for the people behind the scenes. I think that complacent attitude is why Atta went to portland Maine to start the trip that would end at South Tower WTC.
There has been some improvement, but there are still so many holes and things that drive you nuts that it is kinda scary.
The larger airports have made some big improvements, but they still have a long way to go.
And those smart aleck newspeople? In most cases they're not doing anything a terrorist couldn't do. And if they're successful, then that's something we should be worried about. And if they're not then they won't be back on the air to annoy us...
Vorticity From United States of America, joined May 2004, 337 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4940 times:
I think people are obsessed with airplanes, they aren't the only thing Terrorists could go after. Even with terrorism, flying is safer than driving across country. I'll put up with a screening in order to fly
ERJ135 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 699 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4895 times:
Apart from the increased delays at airports, I've never felt any different, security wise, before or after the events of the 11th September.
I flew three days later here in Australia and didn't even think about it despite everyone still being shocked by the events.
Previously mentioned was a concern over non passengers being allowed in the gates which is common practice here in Australia in domestic terminals.Firstly I'm not concerned by this because these people have no bording pass or tickets so they can't and won't be able to board an aircraft, and secondly in order to get to the gate they would have passed through the exact same security that I had to.
Swardu From United States of America, joined May 2004, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4790 times:
I doubt I would go so far as to say I am safer since 9-11, just a whole lot more awareness on the ground and in the air. The TSA is a farce. The TSA does not have enough headcount to do the job with all the layoffs/terminations/resignings yet these people remain on the manning sheets, so their local numbers will look good (that came from a reliable TSA source). Lines can be lengthy at both checkpoints in Term A with only one lane out of 3 or 4 open, due to no manning and the overall refusal to hire additional folks. Items have gotten through the screeners that shouldn't have gotten through and no one seems to mind or care, because after an investigation, it happens again shortly thereafter. I'm sure RDU isn't the only city it's happening to, so it does concern me that honestly nothing has gotten better, but maybe has created more general public and employee awareness.
If you want better security maybe we should have the Isrealis come in and so the military how to do it. They haven't had one single incident happen in 20+ years since the 1st hijacking they had.
VSLover From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1902 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4738 times:
i would say i dont feel any different, but since i am more aware in every situation i am place, i ultimately say i feel less safe.
i doubt security has been vastly improved, but since i am more aware of it now, i do feel less safe.
the only domestic place i feel i have had a competent screening is everytime i go through DEN. i dont know why, maybe it is because i have been caught there so many times and had many extra "special" security screenings. two weeks ago i was going through wearing the EXACT SAME THING i wore when flying out of LGA. yet i set the alarms off, my bags were swabbed and inspected (turned out my building id set off the detectors) but why didnt it do anything at LGA when none of the variables had changed?
the security at nyc airports in unnerving to say the least.
AirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4658 times:
I dont feel any safer since 9/11. Many of the TSA screeners are the former Globe screeners, theres no difference to me. The one thing that I love is that only people that are flying can go through the checkpoint. Non travelers are a pain in the @ss, they're always bugging you about the flight, not to mention clogging the lines to the checklpoint.
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
StevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4632 times:
however the most important tool against terrorism is public vigalence
Exactly! Well said...and that's why I feel safer, because if something starts 'happening' in-flight, people aren't going to let the crew deal with it, they're going to do whatever they can to stop it. We can thank the heroes of UA93 for that, and later the passengers on the AA flight who stopped that moron with a bomb in his shoe.
As far as the T.S.A. goes, I was disturbed by what someone said about them still being poorly paid and trained? Wasn't the whole idea of the 9/11 fee and setting up the T.S.A. and eliminating incompetent screwball outfits like Argenbright that hired felons and illegals who couldn't speak a lick of English? Weren't these new T.S.A. employees supposed to get better training and a nice raise? I dont' mind paying a security fee, if it's going towards improving security.
Personally, I think the agent at the ticket counter who issues the boarding pass is really the one in charge. They're the ones who need the best training and be able to spot suspicious people. They're the first line of defense, and if they don't like what's going on, they don't issue a boarding pass, plain and simple. Two months before 9/11, at PDX, I had a UA ticket counter agent who didn't like me at all, and I wasn't sure I was going to get a boarding pass!
As for letting non-passengers in the boarding areas....NO WAY! NOT EVER AGAIN, as far as I'm concerned. I hate crowds, so that's probably part of it, but I never liked getting to the gate area and not being able to sit down because there's 10 family members seeing off 1 person for a quick 2 hour flight to Vegas...give me a break! The lines at the airport are long enough, thanks...we don't need more people trying to get through the same line at rush hour! I passed through C/D at IAD last August, and it was PACKED, and that was only ticketed folks!
Espion007 From Denmark, joined Dec 2003, 1691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4562 times:
Yes and no.
Yes because about 9 months after 9/11, while connecting in JFK I got a bb gun that resembled an ak-47 (which i bought at moscow's WW2 museum) through security with no problem, yet when they found a pair of manicure scissors in our bags which was bought near ostankino and went crazy.
No becuase the chances of a hijacking are slim to none. I really concentrate more on where im going than whats going to happen on a flight. Plus, who in the world is going to do anything on a plane now if they are thirsty,hungry,and tired from the lack of service since 9/11 and the tiny legroom?
HottieBoi1989 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4618 times:
Well my dad and me almost always fly United First and I think its soooooo retardard that they've removed the curtains separating United First from United Economy. I mean come on maybe the curtains will actually PREVENT the terrorists from getting into the cabin? But year even if the terrorist tried to get into the cockpit they'd have to battle with us, you what what I mean? And us Americans won't take their $#!% this time around!!!
/ / / U N I T E D - It's time to fly!!!!!!!
Air2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4525 times:
Hottie, the reason the curtains were removed is so that more of the cabin is visible to the crew.
I flew on 9/13/2001 & several times since then, both soft seat and jump seat. I've always felt safe flying. I guess what everyone has to understand is that until the terrorists actually began taking control of the aircraft they did NOTHING wrong (except conspiracy). The laws & regualtions in place did not prohibit the items they brought onto the aircraft. The standard operating procedures that had been drilled into us was to immediately comply with terrorists. The terrorists played on these rules and procedures and exploited them. That is why the terrorists gained control of 4 aircraft. It was not due to lax security. It was due to lax regulations and procedures at the time. The security complanies got a bum rap.
I still feel safe. The next attack, and there will be one or two or three, etc., will come from another direction. We have to start thinking more creative and be more vigilant.
: I completely agree with AA757first. I feel safer, not because of the intrusive and overbearing security, not because the US and other governments want
: I flew on 9/13/2001 In the US??? IIRC, airspace wasn't reopened until the day after, 9/14/2001.
: DAL763, That is just a plain silly comment. Millions of Arabs and Muslims flew before 9/11 and nothing like that ever happened before. To not allow Ar
: I don't feel more or less safe flying than I did before 9/11. Agreed! I dont see very much of a change in security with the exception of two things: F
: Hotienoy1989, It wont be just you Americans.. you can count on all of us to stop this if we ever see it happening again, in any part of the world. We
: AA 110 departed ORD to FCO about 3 hours late on Thursday 9/13/2001. I believe we were the 2nd or 3rd aircraft to depart ORD that day. I have some pic
: I feel much safer. And we do not need to allow visitors down in the gate area. This was something stupid to begin with. There is no point of allowing
: Hey Cjuniel...... I think you should ask this question to Bin Laden stop terrorism
: I don't feel any safer, or any more at risk. I too feel TSA is a joke, and all too often, many of the "new" measures that have been enacted since 9/11
: Generally yes as to something like a 9/11 event. Today even the accident rate has dropped to historical lows in the US. Now I would be more worried ab
: If the US should have done it's homework before 9/11, it already would have been safer. But when people thinking "within the US everything is fine and
: I don't know if anyone else has said this but, I never felt unsafe in the first place .
: oaringadi, Who carried out the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil prior to 9-11? Last time I checked the Oklahoma City bombing what carried out by
: I agree with all those who've said it's the passengers (sorry, pax?) who make air travel safer post 9/11. I'm not a regular flyer but when I have flow
: 3 years later and I don't feel even slightly safer, but I have never been even slightly afraid to board an aircraft. The skies weren't dangerous befor
: I think it would be silly to feel unsafe to fly because of terrorists. The risk is tiny to the passengers. 9/11 would not be as easy to happen now, be
: I feel much more safer. First PAX would never let an hostage take over happen to begin with. Second we scan checked luggage and I have seen people get