Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airline Security Changes Planned  
User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2913 times:

Interesting...

Airline Security Changes Planned
Threats Reassessed To Make Travel Easier for Public

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 13, 2005; A01



The new head of the Transportation Security Administration has called for a broad review of the nation's air security system to update the agency's approach to threats and reduce checkpoint hassles for passengers.

Edmund S. "Kip" Hawley, an assistant secretary of homeland security, directed his staff to propose changes in how the agency screens 2 million passengers a day. The staff's first set of recommendations, detailed in an Aug. 5 document, includes proposals to lift the ban on various carry-on items such as scissors, razor blades and knives less than five inches long. It also proposes that passengers no longer routinely be required to remove their shoes at security checkpoints.

Agency officials plan to meet this month to consider the proposals, which would require Hawley's approval to go into effect.

Since his confirmation in June, Hawley has told his staff that he would reevaluate security measures put in place since the terrorist attacks in 2001 and ensure that they make sense, given today's threats. The TSA is struggling with new cuts in the screener workforce imposed by Congress while its new leaders hope to improve the agency's poor reputation among air travelers by introducing more customer-friendly measures. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff signaled the effort when he announced that the agency would eliminate a requirement that forced passengers to remain in their seats during the first and last 30 minutes of flights using Reagan National Airport.

"The process is designed to stimulate creative thinking and challenge conventional beliefs," said TSA spokesman Mark O. Hatfield Jr. "In the end, it will allow us to work smarter and better as we secure America's transportation system."

The TSA memo proposes to minimize the number of passengers who must be patted down at checkpoints. It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.

The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights. Allowing those items was suggested after a risk evaluation was conducted about which items posed the most danger.

If approved, only passengers who set off walk-through metal detectors or are flagged by a computer screening system will have to remove their shoes at security checkpoints. The proposal also would give security screeners the discretion to ask certain passengers "presenting reasonably suspicious behavior or threat characteristics" to remove their shoes.

The proposal also would give screeners discretion in determining whether to pat down passengers. For example, screeners would not have to pat down "those persons whose outermost garments closely conform to the natural contour of the body."

The memo also calls for a new formula to replace the set of computer-screening rules that select passengers for more scrutiny. Currently, the system commonly flags passengers who book one-way tickets or modify travel plans at the last minute. The new TSA plan would give TSA managers assigned to each major airport the authority to de-select a passenger who has been picked out by a computer system.

Some security analysts praised the agency's proposal, saying that security screeners spend too much time trying to find nail scissors and not enough time focused on today's biggest threat: a suicide bomber boarding an airplane. The TSA has very limited capability to detect explosives under a person's clothing, for example, and is trying to roll out more high-tech machines that can protect against such threats.

K. Jack Riley, a homeland security expert at Rand Corp., said hardened cockpit doors, air marshals and stronger public vigilance will prevent another 9/11-style hijacking. "Frankly, the preeminent security challenge at this point is keeping explosives off the airplane," Riley said. The TSA's ideas, he said, "recognize the reality that we know that air transportation security has changed post-9/11. Most of these rules don't contribute to security."

Douglas R. Laird, former head of security for Northwest Airlines, said the proposal was a step backward. Laird said exempting certain categories of passengers from security screening would be dangerous because trusted groups have occasionally abused the privilege. "In an effort to be customer friendly, they're forgetting that their primary requirement is to keep airplanes safe," Laird said. "Either you screen everybody or why screen anybody?"

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlyboyaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2886 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights. Allowing those items was suggested after a risk evaluation was conducted about which items posed the most danger.

Say whatttt????


User currently offlineKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2875 times:

It's about time. None of these "banned items" will bring down a plane. We must think smarter and invest in better technology. Explosives are our problem.

A person who is at the controls of so many lives should not be required to undergo screening. If we can't trust our crew members, then who can we trust?

We've wasted too much time and money so far. Kudos to the new head of the TSA for using some common sense!


User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
K. Jack Riley, a homeland security expert at Rand Corp., said hardened cockpit doors, air marshals and stronger public vigilance will prevent another 9/11-style hijacking. "Frankly, the preeminent security challenge at this point is keeping explosives off the airplane," Riley said. The TSA's ideas, he said, "recognize the reality that we know that air transportation security has changed post-9/11. Most of these rules don't contribute to security."

nice to know somebody understands something..as King stated, its more important to screen for explosives as opposed to knives and what not (not that those aren't important either)..

firearms and explosives should be the two most important things to screen for.



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2809 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 3):
firearms and explosives should be the two most important things to screen for.

Yes, but -not- to the exclusion of other items that could be used to stab people.

I guess they've seem to have forgotten that the 9/11 hijackers used box cutters (then permissible) to kill people. Ice picks, scissors, razor blades and knives less than five inches long are still fully capable of doing so, should someone have evil intent. Yes, cockpit doors are lots tougher, and passengers would much more likely beat the crap out of someone, but the point remains that someone could unnecessarily get hurt.

"Those who do now remember the past are condemned to repeat it..."

[Edited 2005-08-13 21:19:57]

User currently offlineKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2789 times:

The question is will these sharp objects gain access to a cockpit? Pre 9/11 the answer was maybe. Now, with what we know and new training the answer is no. Could these sharp objects hurt someone? Of course, and no one disputes that. No one is forgetting the past, but do not rewrite history.

User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2778 times:

Quoting King (Reply 5):
Could these sharp objects hurt someone? Of course, and no one disputes that. No one is forgetting the past, but do not rewrite history.

How am I rewriting history?


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16991 posts, RR: 67
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2760 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):

Some security analysts praised the agency's proposal, saying that security screeners spend too much time trying to find nail scissors and not enough time focused on today's biggest threat: a suicide bomber boarding an airplane. The TSA has very limited capability to detect explosives under a person's clothing, for example, and is trying to roll out more high-tech machines that can protect against such threats.

Amen to that.

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):

Douglas R. Laird, former head of security for Northwest Airlines, said the proposal was a step backward. Laird said exempting certain categories of passengers from security screening would be dangerous because trusted groups have occasionally abused the privilege. "

As usual, it's gonna be a question of balance.

Quoting King (Reply 2):

A person who is at the controls of so many lives should not be required to undergo screening. If we can't trust our crew members, then who can we trust?

Hmmm. There have been plenty of incidents of people dressing up as crew members complete with ID.

Quoting King (Reply 5):
The question is will these sharp objects gain access to a cockpit? Pre 9/11 the answer was maybe. Now, with what we know and new training the answer is no. Could these sharp objects hurt someone? Of course, and no one disputes that. No one is forgetting the past, but do not rewrite history.

Indeed. And when besides you can use quite a lot of stuff to hurt people, such as a titanium laptop. But the laptop won't help you bash through a cockpit door.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2760 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.



Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights.

These are the only two points I disagree with, and granted the later is more of a gut feeling than one I can come up with a rational basis for disagreeing with (I just wouldn't feel comfortable seeing someone carry a bow and arrow onto a flight, period. Even if it wouldn't bring the flight down. (Curiously, I don't have the same reaction about knives and scissors-- perhaps because they can't as easially be launched/cause harm from a far distance).

The first one, though... PSA's last incident (after being purchased by US Airways) was the result of a former employee who still had his ID being allowed to bypass security with a gun. It really would not be that hard to impersonate a pilot if you were sufficiently motivated and had access to a few basic resources. I don't trust my politicians to do their job... why should I trust them not to "accidentally" bring something they shouldn't on board. (I don't have as strong an objection to the "High Ranking Military" or "Those with top secret clearences"... except for the impersonation possibility)

Lincoln



CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2741 times:

Seeing is believing - when I see it I'll believe it.

I have no problem prohibiting knives (of any length), etc. But this whole removing the shoes thing? The ridiculous crap with lighters?

Quoting King (Reply 2):
None of these "banned items" will bring down a plane

King . . . none of the banned items in and of themselves will bring down a plane, but apply a box cutter or a 4" bladed pocket knife or a decent Mont Blanc writing instrument with the proper technique and the plane will ultimately bring itself down sans living crew members. That said, there must remain an aire of concern, but not to the degree of lunacy we currently have. Of course, common sense should play a part in this as well, alas, we are talking about the TSA are we not? So that point is moot.

As regards your question . . .

Quoting King (Reply 5):
The question is will these sharp objects gain access to a cockpit?

Likely not, but I wouldn't want a bloodbath in the cabin either.

Fortunately, that would be limited I'm sure by the passengers taking steps to prevent same. I can't imagine anyone just sitting on their asses these days. I would not have done so pre 9/11 and I'm sure post 9/11 most passengers won't again.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 4):
"Those who do now remember the past are condemned to repeat it..."

now or not?? Those who do noT remember the past . . . . .


User currently offlineKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2730 times:

Don't forget that many pilots are armed now, and don't forget that no crewmembers may board an aircraft until their ID's have been verified by airline ground personnel.

Sharp objects are bad all around, but we are talking about one form of transportation. Harm is done to many people every day in this world with sharp objects.

Will sharp objects cause another 9/11? No. Sharp objects allowed access to cockpits, but we won't make that mistake again.

Cargo and explosive detection systems is where we need to focus.


User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2723 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 4):
Yes, but -not- to the exclusion of other items that could be used to stab people.



Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 3):
, its more important to screen for explosives as opposed to knives and what not (not that those aren't important either)..

notice what my comment included.. Wink



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21504 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2630 times:

While there are several good ideas coming out of there, there are more than a few that leave me seriously scratching my head.

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
The staff's first set of recommendations, detailed in an Aug. 5 document, includes proposals to lift the ban on various carry-on items such as scissors, razor blades and knives less than five inches long.

Knives? Correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the main reasons that the 9/11 hijackings were able to happen is because knives with blades less than five inches were allowed on board. Is it really a good idea to let these things back on board? Methinks not.

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
The TSA memo proposes to minimize the number of passengers who must be patted down at checkpoints. It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.

Anyone ever see "Catch Me If You Can"? Or remember a certain Egyptair flight? Or the guy who shot someone in New York's City Hall because he was able to bypass security by virtue of being a guest of a city councilmember? This is just asking for trouble.

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights.

EXCUSE ME?!?!?!?!?!? Am I the only one who thinks that ice picks, bows and arrows, and throwing stars have absolutely no place on planes? Is the TSA now employing ninjas as air marshalls? What the hell are they thinking? I really would like someone to explain this one to me. New plot for a crapilly-made scary movie: 150 people trapped inside a metal tube with a crazy guy wielding an icepick.

It is no secret that the TSA is horribly inefficient, but as far as I'm concerned the answer is not to cut down on the number of things that they have to get off of their stools to deal with. I have an out-of-left-field idea that the bigwigs at the DHS and the TSA might want to consider: BETTER TRAINING SO THAT THEY CAN BE MORE EFFICIENT. Do that, and provide the ability for passengers to mail things to themselves if they have prohibited items (charge the heck out of them to do it, but the option should be open). I think that might go a long way.

Because I see these changes as a step backwards.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineAsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2611 times:

Who the hell needs to carry ice picks, throwing stars, and a bow (with arrows, no less) onboard? Are there ninjas who need to bartend while deer hunting on an airplane?

Makes as much sense as me bringing a set of horseshoes onboard...just in case there's a horse that needs a hoof job.

Mark


User currently offlineFLAIRPORT From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2600 times:

Quoting AsstChiefMark (Reply 13):
Are there ninjas who need to bartend while deer hunting on an airplane?

Yes  Silly


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21504 posts, RR: 56
Reply 15, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2561 times:

Hmm, Ninja Archer Mountaineers....

One could have an anime series with that.  silly 

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5167 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2529 times:

Overall, I think the proposal is good. It will speed security and make people feel less like perps being frisked before being taken into custody.

I do have a concern about some of the items being allowed back into the cabin, such as throwing stars, ice picks, etc. Forget the fact that the hijackers on September 11th used box cutters. If a mentally unstable person boards a flight with these items, he could a lot of people before being subdued.

I also think the list of people being exempt from screening is too expansive. Allowing pilots, high-level millitary people, and people with high security clearnaces seems reasonable, especially since IDs are becoming more high tech. But it seems to me that members of Congress, judges, and other elected officials should still be subject to screening. If they don't have to deal with security, how will they understand the complaints fromt the flying public.

There are some ideas missing from the proposed changes. First is a trusted traveler program. If passengers are willing to submit to substantial background checks, in order to avoid some of the highest levels of screening, it will allow screeners to focus on a smaller group of travelers.

Second is the requirement that people have to remove all coats, sweaters, etc. Now, I can see asking people to remove parkas, overcoats, fur coats and other heavy coats. I know that my wool overcoat will keep my fountain pen from setting off metal detectors. But it seems silly to make people take off windbreakers, suit coats and blazers, sweaters, and sweatshirts, and it does slow lines.

Third is the requirement that laptops have to come out of bags. I travel with a lot of electronic devices, including cell phone, PDA, and shaver, and I don't have to remove them from my carry-on. In fact, some government buildings require that visitors turn on all electronic devices at checkpoints. Granted, a laptop is bigger, but an x-ray machine should be capable of seeing through most briefcases and bags.

Fourth is the annoyance at some airports that passengers have to produce ID and boarding pass after going through the metal detectors. This has happened to me at ATL and LGA. If I couldn't get into the security line without my ID, why should I have to show it a second time?

Fifth is the silly requirment that passengers can't agree to pat downs by screeners of the opposite sex. Now, my wife prefers pat downs by women. That's fine, and it should be her right to have a woman pat her down. I personally don't care. What took the cake once was that my wife, while carrying our 6-month-old son, set off the metal detector. The screeners at ATL went nuts trying to find a man to pat down our son. They wouldn't hear of a woman patting him down. Considering that his mother, his grandmothers, a number of nurses, and several babysitters have seen him naked, I don't see the harm in a woman patting him down.

Sixth, checkpoints should have signs indicating which x-ray machines can or can't accept oversized articles. I once had a screener try to stuff my son's stroller into the x-ray machine. It wouldn't fit, so I had to go to the end of another line. A sign would have been handy.

Seventh, checkpoints ought to have express lanes, such as lines that have only the personal item (briefcase or purse) and no laptop. If a person knows how to fly without lugging everything into the cabin, he should be able to get through the checkpoint faster.


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 17, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quote:
Third is the requirement that laptops have to come out of bags

I have no problem with this (except when I forget to take my laptop out of the bag). Most quality laptops have a chassis plate that is opaque to xrays thus rendering the xray useless, with it on it's own in a tray a realistic evaluation can be made of your other contents.

As for allowing star knives, ice picks and bows(with arrows) in the cabin.. that is just crazy... what justification is there for that madness??

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineTonyBurr From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1021 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

Naturally member of Congress would be exempt. They can make the rules, but not follow them. So they would not have to wait on the lines they helped to create?

User currently offlinePhollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2448 times:

Quoting TonyBurr (Reply 18):
Naturally member of Congress would be exempt. They can make the rules, but not follow them. So they would not have to wait on the lines they helped to create?

One of the interesting side effects of the separation of powers is that it limits what the executive branch (TSA et al.) can do to members of Congress, especially when Congress is in session. Remember, by virtue of getting oneself elected to congress one has full access to all classified information, no need for a security clearance. The executive branch does a lot to attempt to limit access, but they cannot legally prevent it.

Of all of the ideas, this one makes no sense.

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
. It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening...people with top-secret security clearances

First why is it only top-secret, what about people with secret and confidential clearances? Does the polygraph requirement have something to do with this? Also, by using this privilege one is effectively advertising their security clearance status, which you really are not supposed to do.

WRT short knives, razor blades, etc. Yes box cutters (razor blades) were the primary weapons of 9/11/01. However, the real enabler was the training that the flight crews had received. Given the basic inability of screening to stop these items with any regularity, might there not be a better use of resources. Screening is an expensive undertaking, and the scarce resources should be spent on the cost effective approaches with real benefits. Use real correlations when screening people, not a random or poorly regressed bases.

The biggest problem with the TSA today is the complete arbitrarily of bases for increased search stringency, e.g., why do some agents require people with flip-flops to remove them, while others let fully closes low cut shoes through. That and most of the screeners fail to recognize that the current batch of magnetometers indicated where in the vertical plain the metal is.

P.S. The best remark from a security screener I ever had, was "... airports are more secure than the CIA." This was after I attempted to point out that is was my shoes that set the magnetometer off and that I would be happy to remove them (I hadn't worn them the previous day but they has set off magnetometers twice that day, and only the TSA was overly concerned). He wanted to have me "wanded" and further searched.


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16991 posts, RR: 67
Reply 20, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2405 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 16):
Fourth is the annoyance at some airports that passengers have to produce ID and boarding pass after going through the metal detectors. This has happened to me at ATL and LGA. If I couldn't get into the security line without my ID, why should I have to show it a second time?

It's a double check. A person checking 1000s of people can easily make a mistake. 2 people, independent of each other, are very unlikely to make the same mistake.

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 16):

Fifth is the silly requirment that passengers can't agree to pat downs by screeners of the opposite sex. Now, my wife prefers pat downs by women. That's fine, and it should be her right to have a woman pat her down. I personally don't care. What took the cake once was that my wife, while carrying our 6-month-old son, set off the metal detector. The screeners at ATL went nuts trying to find a man to pat down our son. They wouldn't hear of a woman patting him down. Considering that his mother, his grandmothers, a number of nurses, and several babysitters have seen him naked, I don't see the harm in a woman patting him down.

My wife and I couldn't care less who searches us. I guess we're not very concerned with this kind of thing. But I realize that for many people, especially in the US, this is a big deal. As for the kid, that story is just hilarious.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 17):

I have no problem with this (except when I forget to take my laptop out of the bag). Most quality laptops have a chassis plate that is opaque to xrays thus rendering the xray useless, with it on it's own in a tray a realistic evaluation can be made of your other contents.

What always makes me wonder is why the only place I have to take my laptop out is the US. Do the European screeners know something the Americans don't?



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2388 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 20):
What always makes me wonder is why the only place I have to take my laptop out is the US. Do the European screeners know something the Americans don't?

Ahh.... The memories... I remember when I was flying 7-10 years ago with my laptop and in most airports it could stay in its bag, but in some it had to come out (and even be turned on!)... I remember connecting at LAX (Skywest SAN-LAX to Skywest LAX-FAT as UA coded on an EMB-120... Actually, I think it may have been same plane service).

At the time they were doing some minor renovations in the terminal and one of the things that the "Pardon our Dust" signs promised was new X-Ray machines so it would no longer be necessary to remove laptops from their cases. How times have changed...

[If the problem is the "base plate" in laptops... what good does taking it out of the case do? Why not make us turn it on like the "good old days?"]

I also long for the days when unticketed people are allowed past security again...

Lincoln



CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5167 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2342 times:

Starlionblue:

I understand it's a double check, but my problem is a) it's hit and miss. Why do they do it sometimes at ATL and LGA, but never at ORD, and b) the screener gets all huffy when I tell him I need to retrieve my coat and wallet, because I have put away my driver's license and boarding pass. I know some people just fold up their passes and tuck them and their licenses in a pocket.
I don't. Folding a pass makes it harder for the scanner at the gate to read, and I once lost my driver's license, when I didn't put it back in my wallet.

At ORD, the people at the security entrance do a pretty thorough review of documents. My wife renewed her license via the telephone, so the expiration date is a sticker on the back of the license. They are always questioning her as to why she is trying to use an expired license.


User currently offlineBoeing 747-311 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 21):

I also long for the days when unticketed people are allowed past security again...

I think that has to do with how long the lines are. imagine if there are tons more people trying to go threw the security lines and they are not even boarding the plane...



Come fly with US
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 24, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2263 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quote:
What always makes me wonder is why the only place I have to take my laptop out is the US. Do the European screeners know something the Americans don't?

Have to do it in Australia as well... there was a time when they made you take out the batteries as well!!

Quote:
[If the problem is the "base plate" in laptops... what good does taking it out of the case do? Why not make us turn it on like the "good old days?"]

The problem with the baseplate is it obscures everything else in your bag, turning it on may have been an option when laptops were rare, now almost everybody has one could you imagine what turning them all on would do to the delay at screening? As well as juggling your other belongings and handling all the "no network found", "work offline" type messages!!!

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
25 Tsaord : disclaimer: these are the opinions of the "individual" poster! first let me say, there was this guy a while back, i forgot his name, he tried to set o
26 L-188 : This move is overdue and just a drop in the bucket. The bigger issue is getting rid of the TSA in it's entirety and put the job of security back in th
27 L-188 : Agreed, they should have to live like the common man.
28 Halls120 : The 9/11 hijackers could have suceeded using ballpoint pens. They succeeded because prior to 9/11, all US airline pilots were under orders not to res
29 Halls120 : King is entirely correct. Under the wing security remains the weak spot of aviation security.
30 Tsaord : well us morons didnt decide to take over security at americas airports. nor do the morons who screen passengers and baggage daily make any of the scr
31 L-188 : Dammit, Tsaord...I keep forgeting that you are working for them. Nothing personal, you are correct that you don't write the procedures, but an old Jed
32 Post contains images Tsaord : well...then i guess there are thousands of fools who work for the tsa..since its a paying job. and nothing personal should be taken on here! we all fr
33 Cloudy : My brother is an airline pilot. He said any of the 9/11 flight crews could have easily resisted - every cockpit has an emergency egress axe - an item
34 Contrails : I think some people may have missed the point with this proposal. TSA now says that it's ok to bring these items onboard, because the planes now have
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...
A Good Idea For Airline Security! posted Thu Dec 15 2005 01:09:25 by Slashd0t
Pilot - A New Approach To Airline Security posted Mon Jun 6 2005 03:24:52 by JumboJet
Report Presses Easy Ways To Fix Airline Security posted Sun Jun 5 2005 06:30:51 by Schipholjfk
Airline Fare Changes posted Mon Aug 9 2004 04:47:18 by Oznznut
Commuter Airline Security posted Tue Feb 17 2004 10:19:51 by Jhooper
Europe Vs. USA Airline Security posted Thu Feb 5 2004 08:50:31 by Jhooper
The FBI's Latest On Airline Security... posted Tue Dec 30 2003 03:14:42 by OPNLguy
CEO Of An Airline-What Changes Would You Make? posted Fri Dec 19 2003 14:11:41 by 777ER
US Based Airline Security Clearance Regulations posted Mon Nov 24 2003 03:56:07 by Pmanchuk
IATA: Governments Should Pay For Airline Security posted Wed Nov 19 2003 17:21:08 by Singapore_Air