Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LHR Scanner Gives 'The Naked Truth'  
User currently offlineATLhomeCMH From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 770 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7060 times:

A security scanner at London Heathrow doesn't just spot weapons or other contraband. Its X-rays see through clothing, producing a "naked" image of passengers. The device is inside a curtained area where passengers, chosen at random, assume several poses to register their image. Those who demur are given hand searches. "It was really horrible," one woman passenger told the London Sunday Times. "It doesn't leave much to the imagination because you're virtually naked, but I guess it's less intrusive than being hand searched." A man said he was "shocked" at what he saw and felt "embarrassed." Security officials say the scanner is far more effective than conventional metal detectors, but the U.S. Transportation Security Administration has refused to deploy it until it can be modified to preserve some modesty. Posted 7:00 a.m. ET

Somewhat bizarre. Once again we revisit the privacy vs. security issue. At least people are given the option of a pat-down search.

It'll be interesting to see how much of an outcry it causes here in the States  Wow!


"The most terrifying words in the Engligh language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"-Ronald Reagan
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDogfighter2111 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6991 times:


Just got to say, i was departing on a flight from EDI (UK, Scotland) to LHR (UK, England) and the bleeper went of, i was searched but my shoes weren't checked, i could have had a knife or bomb in my shoe.

Mike


User currently offlineMeister808 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 973 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6955 times:

I think I would rather have the x-ray scanner than get patted down... I mean, we are talking the lesser of 2 evils here, but getting hand-searched has got to suck.

-Meister



Twin Cessna 812 Victor, Minneapolis Center, we observe your operation in the immediate vicinity of extreme precipitation
User currently offlineDogfighter2111 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6912 times:

No not really, they arn't exactly a lot of raving Pervs, they won't go round enjoying it.

User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26426 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6890 times:

You know, when I flew from Tabriz, Iran to THR in 1986 they had no metal detectors. That's right nothing. They just had a line of men (and I assume women) crounching in cubicals frisking everyone who was about the board the flight. Was actually much quicker than a metal detector. I think this naked detector crosses the line with privacy, and would prefer a frisk, as long as they are not reaching in anywhere.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineLeezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6881 times:

I think that the way the press words their articles makes it sound like these machines are some sort of James Bond type xray things that are just like looking at someone naked standing in front of you.

In reality it is probably a similar image to those of a conventional baggage x-ray that will show what is under the clothes as either black or white or colour image of the body contours and thats it. It won't be able to show skin tones and textures in the way a photograph can.

 Smile



"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6795 times:

If you've been to a typical airport in the U.S. (or anywhere, really) lately, I think you'll find that most passengers going through the security checkpoint are not exactly Playboy models. In other words, people who jump to criticize these machines are generally mistaken in their belief that the screeners really WANT to see them naked. More important, I think Leezyjet is right--the images produced on these machines are not centerfold-quality nudie pics, but just reveal where there is skin and where there is, say, metal.

Seems to me it would speed up the whole security check process--just think about it, no removal of shoes or belts or jackets or anything. I think it would be great to at least have an "express lane" option with a machine of this type, with another option to be checked with a traditional metal detector (and wanded/frisked as necessary) for those who are still uncomfortable with the idea and would prefer to wait in line.



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineVS045 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 192 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6761 times:

If it just comes up as a thermal-image type of picture, then thats okay. But proper photo quality is a huge invasion of privacy, not to mention awful for the screeners!

Cheers,
VS045



4 engines 4 long haul
User currently offlineA340600 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 4105 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6661 times:

Heard it on local radio this morning. The image will still see you with your clothes on, just like you're pressed up against glass Laugh out loud

Sam Big thumbs up



Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
User currently offlineLeezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 53
Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 6470 times:

"If it just comes up as a thermal-image type of picture, then thats okay. But proper photo quality is a huge invasion of privacy, not to mention awful for the screeners!"

I don't think that they will ever be able to produce a machine that can see you in all your naked glory by looking through your clothes, how would the machine be able to produce the skin texture and tones etc from an xray for example ??.

I think that is just a fantasy that has been dreamed up from various films in the past and has been ceased upon by the press.

Now a machine similar to the one in Total Recall (where Arnie runs through and you just see his skeleton running with the gun) will become a reality as they show up just what is needed and nothing more and if it did become a reality, it would really speed up the security process for everyone.

 Smile



"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
User currently offlineStearmanNut From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 352 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 6405 times:

This brings to mind the issue of radiation poisoning. Who regulates the X Ray machines and calibrates them for proper X Ray dosage? Certainly the ones handling the machines are not medical professionals. I certainly would not trust some of the goofy-assed airport security people I have seen in some airports (STL for one, LBB, another) to operate such dangerous equipment safely.

I feel this is a very serious issue. Passengers are being routed through X Ray units and being put at high risk of being given too harsh a dose. We already know what would happen to a foetus if a lady in early pregnancy was to receive a heavy dose.

Flouroscopes were banned from public use in shoe stores in the early 50's because it became apparent that such heavy doses were causing radiation damage. Essentially the machines used in airports are no different than those flouroscopes.



If wishes were horses, a Tail Dragger I would fly...
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17017 posts, RR: 67
Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6359 times:

If they want to image my body, they're free to it do it. But seriously, they would only get the contours so what's the huge frelling hairy?


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6287 times:

yes..at this point in time, there is nothing being used which has "x-ray" capabilities and allow one too see someone else in "full glory".....

the topic of radiation overdose is something which should be brought up though...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineAreopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1369 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6264 times:

It's a safe microwave frequency that passes right through textiles and hair but bounces off skin and metals. About mid-2003 there was a demo of a SafeView scanner by a woman who was - what, assistant FAA administrator, or something? Anyway, she showed up pretty well revealed. It was in the news on the web, but I can't find it now.


User currently offlineCorpsnerd09 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6258 times:

Just got to say, i was departing on a flight from EDI (UK, Scotland) to LHR (UK, England) and the bleeper went of, i was searched but my shoes weren't checked, i could have had a knife or bomb in my shoe.

Mike


I had a similar experience two years ago, in Aug of 2002. I was chosen "randomly" for hand search and the lady told me to take off my shoes. As she searched, I sparked a conversation with her about how she now has to check my shoes because of the shoe bomber. I cracked a joke, she laughed and then told me I was free to go. The problem is that my shoes were still on the ground. She had never checked them! I put them on and walked back onto the plane when I realized she hadn't done so. This was at MDW, flying with TZ. It just goes to show that even with the new measures, it can take something as easy as friendly conversation to distract the searcher and bypass the check.



If you really want to do it, you will find a way; if you don't, you'll make excuses.
User currently offlineRamerinianair From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5644 times:

I have to tell you. They don't feel you up or anything when they pat you down. I would not mind the naked ting though. I'm not getting a photo taken and I'm not going to see the screener ever again soooooooo . . . No big deal.
SR
PS I'm sure it will recieve much complaining in the US if the right people find out.



W N = my Worst Nightmare!!!!!
User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5209 times:

Gee, I hope the moderators don't delete THIS post for non-relevance!...

Go to http://www.rapiscan.com/secure1000.html for the scoop on Rapiscan's "see-through" scanner. For those who don't want to go to the link...



As to the subject of radiation exposure, http://www.rapiscan.com/secure1000safety.html. According to the company's information:

MEDICAL
CT (CAT Scan) Up to 1,000,000 microRem
Chest, Mammography Up to 10,000 microRem

BACKGROUND RADIATION
Denver (5000 ft.) Up to 600 microRem per day
Miami (sea level) Up to 300 microRem per day
Inside vs. outside a building Up to 25 microRem per day

AIRLINE PASSENGER DOSE
One hour flight Up to 500 microRem per hour

SECURE 1000 Less than 10 microRem per scan!


Hope this adds to the discussion!

MxCtrlr  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.  Smokin cool



DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4927 times:

thats horrible but no doubt effective

User currently offlineRichm From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 798 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4900 times:

It is not that bad. It's not like I looked in great detail or anything, but you can't see his willy... So I don't see what the problem is...

[Edited 2004-11-09 10:20:50]

User currently offlineWdleiser From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 961 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3603 times:

I swear in Frankfurt when heading back to the USA the Security guys at the Last Checkpoint where a patdown is mandatory, always give me a firm ass grab. I guess because I have such amazing looks and I am 16.

User currently offlinePacificWestern From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3374 times:

It is not that bad. It's not like I looked in great detail or anything, but you can't see his willy... So I don't see what the problem is...


I think for the purposes of posting the example on the web, the company altered the photograph so as to obliterate his willy. Or gawdforbid, the subject never had one in the first place.  Big grin


User currently offlinePacificWestern From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3346 times:

I swear in Frankfurt when heading back to the USA the Security guys at the Last Checkpoint where a patdown is mandatory, always give me a firm ass grab. I guess because I have such amazing looks and I am 16.


It's good to know that there are people out there in the world such as yourself who do not suffer from low self-esteem. lol


User currently offlineClearedDirect From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3185 times:

They have done this at MCO. A female official (as previously mentioned) went thru the device and her picture was put in the local paper. Areas were blurred or grayed out.
I believe it was a prototype and is not in service - pending some fine tuning and privacy issues had to be addressed. This was about a year ago.


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...
Airbus Gives The Go-ahead For The A350 posted Fri Dec 1 2006 14:11:39 by Gh123
Taking A Scanner Through The TSA Checkpoint posted Sat Jun 10 2006 22:04:24 by Phelpsie87
LHR T4: Why The Long Lines Recently? posted Sun Feb 5 2006 16:37:51 by Comorin
LHR Vs. LGW: The BA Policy? posted Mon Nov 7 2005 11:28:44 by ENCRJ
Any Plans For LPL-LHR Service In The Future? posted Wed Aug 13 2003 08:59:39 by B777FA
Traveling LHR-LAS, Need The Absolute Best Airline posted Sun May 18 2003 01:52:14 by Pmk
Airband Scanner In The US..? posted Tue Apr 1 2003 17:37:06 by Lorenz
The Pathetic Truth About TSA posted Wed Sep 4 2002 23:21:48 by LN-MOW
Getting Bumped:Who Gives The Highest Compensation posted Sat Jul 20 2002 23:56:54 by Trickijedi
LHR Is NOT The World's Busiest Airport! posted Wed Feb 20 2002 12:05:07 by Airbus Lover