Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TSA May Let Non-fliers Go To Gates  
User currently offlineMiCorazonAzul From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10216 times:

REALLY bad idea if you ask me........

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2006-12-07-tsa_x.htm?imw=Y


Security lines are long as is, I can't imagine how much WORSE it will be if this goes through.

Your thoughts?

115 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNorthwestEWR From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 410 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10218 times:

Yeah the last thing we need is more people in the security line !!!!
and I thought the TSA couldn't get a dumber !



ARJ 319 320 333 717 733 735 73G 738 739 742 752 753 762 772 CRJ CR9 ER3 ERJ FRJ J31 J41 D9S D94 D95 M81 M82 M88
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 49
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10188 times:

I think it should stay the way it is right now. We have gotten use to it this way. Also it helps the airline employees working the gate area to deal with just the flying pax and not Aunt Martha wondering where Jimmy's plane is!


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineZschocheImages From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10175 times:

I miss the days though when I could just go to an airport and wander around. For example, while I was on vacation I would go and just take pictures or just explore. The first time I couldn't do that, in Europe and then again in Asia, I was quite surprised. Then when 9/11 came around that all stopped. I was dissapointed. I know that the terminals will be more crowded, but maybe it will help airlines (at least in the US) return to their glory days by openind up their name to the non-traveler.


Why fly with 2 engines when you can have 3?
User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10176 times:

Its strange how the USA was almost the only country to ever allow this - non passengers airside -
Certainly none of the European airports did and I've been all round the world and never seen it anywhere else


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 10151 times:

Quoting MiCorazonAzul (Thread starter):
REALLY bad idea if you ask me........

Absolutely agree . . .

The lines and the TSA are bad enough at the moment . . . why compound the problem by letting everyone through . . . ridiculous.

Yet another moronic proposal by the illustrious TSA . . .

 sarcastic 


User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10128 times:

Some non airline passengers are already allowed to be in the gate areas.

Parents (only one) of non-accompanied minors. (Wife and I had to flip a coin as to who would go.)



Delete this User
User currently offlineAirEMS From United States of America, joined May 2004, 684 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10128 times:

Doesn't this come up every year?

Well my thoughts are 1: Don't do it if it impacts the waits to get pax through security... But why couldn't they let non pax through during slow times... or what about places like DEN where you have multiple security points (The Main one and then the one over the bridge) Finally how many people would this add? other than a majority of A.Net patrons? I've never heard honey I'm bored lets go walk around the airport.... Is this a huge amount of people that this could add??

Just my thoughts
-Carl



If Your Dying Were Flying
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10123 times:

Quoting Stirling (Reply 6):
Some non airline passengers are already allowed to be in the gate areas.

Also folks attending meetings with Club Members at the Airside Airline Clubs . . . quite a difference that than having a couple dozen visitors per departing 737 airside clamoring for space in the TSA lines.


User currently offlineNwafflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1050 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10109 times:

Not just unaccompanied minors, but also senior citizens with needs -- I have taken my mother, age 88, to the gate in a wheelchair several times. Yes, I have to take one wheelchair to security, and I have to have a pass, but after security, (and after I show my pass and ID) I just get her another wheel chair

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21456 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10102 times:

Quoting Antonovman (Reply 4):
Its strange how the USA was almost the only country to ever allow this - non passengers airside -
Certainly none of the European airports did and I've been all round the world and never seen it anywhere else

I remember as a kid that the New York airports would suspend gate access during holiday/peak times.

At EWR it wasn't such a big deal, since most of the concessions are outside of security, so the authorities there were quite happy to limit access. But most other USA airports were designed such that anyone waiting outside security has nowhere to sit, eat, etc.

The airports make money on "dwell time" (their term) and people waiting for customers to land is prime money making dwell time. I'm sure the airports are pushing for this rule change to maximize revenue, even if it makes lines longer and compromises safety.

After all, the dirty secret is the "3 hours" recommendation for arriving during peak times is NOT for logistical reason, at least not 3 hours worth of reasons, not at every airport in the USA. It's to encourage dwell time at many otherwise efficient airports, and thus more shopping. Seriously. IAH admitted as much on a news report in Houston when they recommended 3 hours recently for Thanksgiving. Security at IAH takes 15 minutes, tops, even during holiday times. Check-in the same. Getting to gate is 15 minutes max. Boarding starts max 45 minutes before departure. Where does that extra 1.5 hours come from? The desire to sell food and products to "hostage" customers...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineJmc1975 From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3252 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10051 times:

If this happens, what will be the point of the TSA? Bring on the minimum wage illegals who can't speak English...it's at least cheaper for taxpayers.


.......
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10028 times:

Quoting MiCorazonAzul (Thread starter):
REALLY bad idea if you ask me........

GOOD RIDDANCE!! I totally agree!! What is the TSA doing NOW?! What the *BLEEP!*

Quoting Stirling (Reply 6):
Some non airline passengers are already allowed to be in the gate areas.

Parents (only one) of non-accompanied minors. (Wife and I had to flip a coin as to who would go.)

I dont think thats what the thread is about. This has been the norm ever since.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2061 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10027 times:

The TSA should just go back to the old screening. There is little evidence that post 9/11/01 screening has improved security. It has only made air travel more of a hassle. Its only actual function is to give passengers the impression that they are being protected.

User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10007 times:

A lot of you are against this for logistical reasons. Fair enough, but that isn't the TSA's concern. Can you think of a security problem? Honestly I can't. The "secure area" is secure no matter who is inside it.


Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 9991 times:

Quoting We're Nuts (Reply 14):

Its already way too crowded behind the security checkpoints as it is. Letting non-ticketed pax back into the secure areas just makes the crowds worse than it really is now.

Keep it the way it is now, please! If the TSA allows non-ticketed pax past the checkpoints, there is not going to be places to sit at the gate anymore, go figure!!!



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5333 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 9952 times:

Many very good points brought up above. I think there's always been lots of pressure by many factions to start letting non-pax back into the concourses. I know there have been past experiments with it but I never seem to hear the outcome.

I think there are more reasons to change the restrictions than there are to continue the current policy. The whole assistance thing (to kids, seniors, handicapped, fearful-flyers, etc.), the empty stores and eateries, the pro-air-travel and subliminal advertising environment that exist in the gate areas, and the bottom-line factor, as mentioned earlier in the thread: how many additional people will this REALLY add to TSA's workload? are all, in my opinion, very valid reasons to change the policy.

Personally, from the stand-point of someone who's spent many years of his life at airports (inside and out), I would love to again be able to get thru security as a non-passenger. I applaud TSA for even considering this change of policy.

Happy Holidays to All.

bb


User currently offlineThegooddoctor From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 523 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 9953 times:

I'll side with all of the people who say this is a bad idea. We've gotten used to it - and some of us actually like it better the way it is now! In some airports its crowded on the sterile side as it is.

If this does go through, it will make elite status really really pay off for a lot of fliers as the rest of the security checkpoints will be rediculously crowded (as in, more rediculously crowded...)

It's funny, this post made me think of the last flight I took before the new security procedures were put in place (NW 286 PHX-DTW, August 25, 2001). Flying then seemed a lot less complicated...



The GoodDoctor
User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26335 posts, RR: 76
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9888 times:

Quoting MiCorazonAzul (Thread starter):
REALLY bad idea if you ask me........

Why? It worked fine before 9/11 and PIT already does it.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 5):
The lines and the TSA are bad enough at the moment . . .

Two things to blame for that. The TSA generally and the checking of IDs to boarding passes. One of the biggest reasons for security line bottle necks is the introduction of sterile zone rules that has people's IDs being checked to their boarding passes. Before 9/11, when LAX had 8 million or so more passengers a year, T1 didn't have insane security lines like today. The reason now is that the ID checkers create a massive bottle neck at the base of the escalators/staircase up to the check point. Get rid of them and you will actually help that line.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 49
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9876 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 18):
Why? It worked fine before 9/11 and PIT already does it.

PIT does not do it.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineFloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2006 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9867 times:

Quoting NorthwestEWR (Reply 1):
and I thought the TSA couldn't get a dumber !

Exactly, just when you thought they couldn't get any worse, right?



Good goes around!
User currently offlineLuketenley From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9845 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 18):
Why? It worked fine before 9/11 and PIT already does it.

PIT was going to but never ended going through with it. We do have a secondary checkpoint that could be used for this if they ended up letting non traveling people back through.



Pittsburgh International Airport lover
User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26335 posts, RR: 76
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9840 times:

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 19):
PIT does not do it.

My mistake. I thought I had read somewhere that they allow people through because of the Air Mall.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineEvan767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2957 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9817 times:

Will it really make that much of a difference? Who's going to stand in a long security line and strip down to go through just to see their relatives a few minutes earlier anyway? I know at most airports, excluding the big ones, security checkpoint is right next to the gates. I really don't think this would have a noticeable affect.


The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
User currently offlineJcavinato From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 520 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9811 times:

The interesting thing about PIT is in the mid-90s there were some Saturdays and Sundays at the inside concessions that earned as much as a third of their sales revenue from local people who just came to the airport as a destination. The food court was pretty good (I haven't been there since 2000), and you'd see families walking around. I thought that was a back-to-the-future airport at the time with that phenomenon.

25 N1120A : Big airports are where people notice these things the most. The biggest airport when it comes to O&D (where people will actually be going through the
26 DeltAirlines : Please don't let this happen. Security checkpoints are bad enough as it is, where there are plenty of people who don't realize that those coins or you
27 VEEREF : One thing I can say I truly don'y miss is the whole fam damily waiting RIGHT AT THE JETWAY DOOR to greet Aunt Mabel as she deplanes, completely blocki
28 Post contains images Thomasphoto60 : Well as both a frequent traveler and airline enthusiast, I am a little conflicted. On one hand I certainly do miss the days of freely strolling throug
29 AirframeAS : Wait a second....you work for TWO airlines?! I thought an airline employee was not allowed to work for the competition, that's pretty standard here i
30 Boeing7E7 : 1. They already screen every bag with CTX machines. 2. The technology is there for sniffing pass through machines for passengers. 3. Anyone can read
31 Wdleiser : Apart from longer lines, ... it is no risk to me at all. it is up to the gate agent to make sure only ticketed passengers get on the plane, it shouldn
32 SirOmega : On the issues of longer lines, I honestly dont think it would be that big of a deal. Why? Simply because as someone who is not traveling, just going a
33 VEEREF : And it is true at the companies I work for as well. However, they do not compete with, nor do business with each other so it is within the guidlines
34 PanAmOldDC8 : Remember the good old days when I could bring anyone I wanted on to the tarmac to meet family or friends as I worked for Pan Am. But that was the 60's
35 TPAnx : Bingo!! We have a winner! Some airports are reporting revenue losses because most of their concessions are "airside"--near the gates. They want to gi
36 Post contains images MIAMIx707 : There are airports (like MCO for example) that have nice facilities with ample space where one could go see the planes leave their gates and say goodb
37 Gh123 : Perfectly put - my opinion exactly!
38 Post contains links Highflier92660 : Beyond the convenience of Aunt Gertrude meeting her family at the gate, the people who stand to gain the most from a relaxation of the TSA restriction
39 Galapagapop : I was just in LGA last night and the LAST thing needed is more people on the concourse, I mean come on! Only certain airports have extremly nice food,
40 Nonrevman : I would not object to it as long as ticketed passengers are given priority in the security line. This would help revent people from missing their flig
41 Nonrevman : I would not object to it as long as ticketed passengers are given priority in the security line. This would help revent people from missing their flig
42 Post contains links Greg76 : I know in yesterdays' Detroit paper, they're saying that anyone staying at the Westin Hotel attached to the McNamara Terminal at DTW, WITH extensive b
43 Mir : LGA does not - all the good stuff is outside (at least in the Central Terminal, the USAir and Delta terminals are different) I'd like to see non-trav
44 DeltaJet757 : That would be a stupid thing to do, let non-fliers go to the gates. I'm not mad about it but I really don't like the idea. Here's the biggest problem
45 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Because security before 9/11 was more of a joke than it is now. . . No laptops out of cases, no shoes off, no little bullshit bag of 4oz or less of l
46 Matt777 : Non fliers going through security? Longer lines? Why not make them pay the cost of the service with maybe an additional contribution to the benefit of
47 Post contains images Lightsaber : I'm of mixed emotions on this. I too remember the days of going to LAX and walking family and friends to their gate as the flight departed. We also ha
48 LAXdude1023 : Unfortunately, I get to see them every 3 weeks. ATL security checkpoint is horribly disorganized. They really ought to have more checkpoints.
49 RiddlePilot215 : However with added people to process, it might make them more efficient?
50 STT757 : All of Terminal C's concessions (the best out of any terminal in the NYC area) are beyond security, Im sure they would love the extra revenue back.
51 Post contains images Scbriml : Well it's probably OK at Buttsville, Wyoming with five ERJ flights a day, but try it at ATL or ORD and see what a mess you get pretty damn quick. Tho
52 Post contains images Bomber996 : After thanksgiving I found it really easy to get through security to meet my grandmother at the gate. to tell you the truth it almost scared me. I wen
53 MEACEDAR : It actually can help people on a.net, they will be able to spot aircrafts from the terminal.
54 Post contains images Bmacleod : Although non-fliers in the US were free to access the gates areas pre-9/11, Canadian airports were smart enough not to let this happen. And after 9/11
55 MPDPilot : I think if there is a seperate line then who cares. This doesn't compromise safety all it does is make more people safer. in the sence that if you go
56 Ckfred : Here's my problem. I have a 3-year old boy who loves airplanes. When my in-laws come to visit, they want me to bring him to the airport. (He's the onl
57 Gh123 : Airports are busy enough. As many have posted above, the lines for security are long enough. Sometimes it is tough enough to get a seat at a bar betwe
58 Jonathan L : No. Why would people even want to go through that hassle if they don't have to fly? There's no way I'd ever opt to do that just for meeting or leaving
59 AirframeAS : At least somebody agrees with me! Thank you, sir!
60 Kearney : The way i see it is airline travel has gone down hill over the years, i would not mind seeing any changes back to the way it used to be. That is any c
61 AADC10 : There is still no evidence that any of the above limitations make flying safer. Items still slip through screenings constantly and the failure rate h
62 Kearney : I go through security to go to work. half time that im watching the worker who is screening my bag, he or she is busy chatting away with a collegue.
63 ABQopsHP : Not just no, but h*ll no! TSA cant get it right passing tests given them by undercover agents testing the system to see if they can get an item throug
64 AirWillie6475 : Finally, it's about time. I never understood the policy of not letting people without a boarding pass through security. If they are searched and are n
65 KingAirMan : Im all for it, Let the glory days of air travel return. Yes , I know many of you think they are gone, BUT PLEASE, let the hopeless hope. I miss being
66 MiCorazonAzul : because they aren't traveling? Sooooooo, the moral of the story is: if you aren't flying, you shouldn't be in the secure area. Only under special cir
67 Post contains images ANCFlyer : I quite agree, I think they're all BS myself. My point was to illustrate that prior to 9/11 - when Security was a joke - it was a bit more convenient
68 Trvlr : Shouldn't airports build more screening capacity? Wouldn't extra people in the airports mean more money for airport vendors? How about streamlining hu
69 AirframeAS : If you want more capacity, YOU pay for it. Nothing comes free. The airports dont pay for security anymore. Why do you think pax pays the 9/11 fee for
70 Post contains images Ikramerica : Untrue. The 60s saw bombings, hijackings and terrorism. Airports just hadn't figured out what to do about it yet. Despite all the whining and complai
71 AirWillie6475 : What if I get secured? Does that mean I still can't be in there? This policy doesn't prevent anything. It's just a post 9/11 TSA BS so that lines are
72 NorthwestEWR : All the times I've been through security in the past 6 months it's been pretty bad. List of wait times in 6 months. July EWR T-C : 20 minutes MCO T-A
73 MiCorazonAzul : The problem is not getting secured. The issue is the amount of time going through security will take if you add non-travelers to the bunch. Getting s
74 Post contains links SirOmega : Actually I believe LAS is paying for theirs. The airport is paying for another security screeing area for the C concourse (WN) and all of the current
75 Ikramerica : Maybe you and I have a different definition of bad? Only bad one on that list is MCO, which would likely not implement this new plan due to the "mall
76 AirWillie6475 : Maybe it's just me, I've been to the good airports, MCO was less than 5 minutes, LAX is about 5-10 for United, Southwest is 5-15 depending on the tim
77 Ikramerica : What seems to trip up people more than anything is "please keep your boarding pass with you." Especially foreigners (non-USA citizens). I notice this
78 Ckfred : If TSA is going to continue to keep out non-passengers fromt the secure zone, then airports need to offer something beyond coffee in the ticketing and
79 Post contains images Ikramerica : And you lived to tell about it!
80 Luketenley : The food court is about the same. Mcds, QDoba, Sbaro, Madison Ave Deli, Wok n Rol chinese place, coffee place, and ben n jerries/ garden gazebo. Not
81 AirframeAS : And who is going to be doing the screening? TSA or a private contractor? If its the TSA, that STILL comes out of the 9/11 fee and not from the airpor
82 Gh123 : I'm going to say this bluntly. This is probably the most stupid idea ever. What a waste of frickin time I travel a lot and I am fed up with all those
83 Baron95 : First off, anyone willing to print a fake e-ticket boarding pass (like the ones you print at home whn you check in on line) can get pass security and
84 Post contains images Scbriml : Only one over 20 minutes? I think you got off lightly. Try LHR, ORD or IAH (late afternoon for the international "rush hour"), then get back to us. P
85 TwinOtter : Hehe, I see which way the wind is blowing, but I really like this idea. I often overnight at the Westin at DTW. It used to gall me that I could not en
86 MD-90 : Not every airport has terrible security lines. It'd be nice to meet my dad at the gate when he flies into Huntsville, instead of having to wait in the
87 Ikramerica : IAH has solved their problem by opening the International Arrivals/Departures Terminal E. So much so that they closed down some check-in facilities i
88 San747 : That's the best suggestion I've read on this thread so far. Let the people who WANT terminal access pay for it, and let the airports get some additio
89 N1120A : More like the intelligence barrier. It is counter intuitive to have your boarding pass checked 60 seconds or so before having it checked again. Thank
90 Ikramerica : I'd say it is equally silly to place your boarding pass and passport/ID in a tray on a conveyor and then walk away from it in a public place. I like
91 N1120A : Sure, I like having them in my pocket too, though often times I just put them in a jacket when I put it on the belt since I have them in my hand afte
92 764 : This is the BEST news in a long time. Keeping non-fliers from accessing the gate areas did nothing for security anyway (as if a boarding pass makes it
93 Ryan h : In Australia the non flying public in domestic terminals can still go to the gates.
94 VEEREF : I'll say it again, if implemented CORRECTLY it wouldn't be a bad idea. BUT-the TSA has a whole lot of ongoing stuff they need to un-f##k first before
95 Thomasphoto60 : I recall ADL having a great ground level view of the ramp that seemingly would provide for some great shots at unusual ground level angles. I was rec
96 HAMAD : it can be done this way too. if you are a passenger with a boarding pass, yes you can take the permitted amount of carry on luggage, however, if you a
97 Post contains images ANCFlyer : And the belt buckles, and the underwire bras, and the boarding passes, and the ID, and the watches . . . . . . . . . . . Still doing this in ANC. Rid
98 Ctbarnes : Personally, I'd rather see the TSA do away with the ludicrous toothpaste ban than allowing more people to clog the checkpoints. I too miss the days wh
99 Ikramerica : Me too. And I make sure my computer is in "the middle" of my stuff, not the first item out...
100 KangarooMAN : I've got to hand it to you you've come up with the best answer i'm security at MAN and we have the same problems people saying i didn't see the signs
101 Gh123 : Absolutely right.
102 Ryan h : Thomasphoto60, the new Adelaide terminal does offer good views of the tarmac and the main runway.
103 Post contains images JayDavis : I have a few questions about this. Why have European airports been operated the way they have been for so long, not allowing people other than tickete
104 AerorobNZ : Bags not listening to the families of pax at the gate if something goes wrong. The last thing stretched gate facilities need are people who aren't eve
105 Post contains images Baron95 : Thanks San747 - but if it makes too much sense, you know the chances of the government actually adopting it are ZERO
106 AirframeAS : And I hope you get bumped by a ticketed pax while you are snapping pics. The airport is not a playground, its a place of business.
107 Pgh234 : While I do see the argument against this happening in busy airports, I see no reason why it cant happen in smaller airports. When I was little, my fam
108 AerorobNZ : Correct it is, but the one thing that stops it from being a total farce is that Nontravellers cannot get to the gate, they cannot collect drug parcel
109 Ikramerica : Again, despite air travel figures increasing dramatically during the jet age, both in number of pax and in number of flights, the incident of terrori
110 Delta767300ER : I cant believe all the whining that I am hearing about letting Non-Ticketed passengers back into the Gate Areas. All of us are Aviation Enthusiasts an
111 Access-Air : Actually guys, I am more for TSA allowing Non-Ticketed people pass thru the security check points rather than what is happening now..... For years, it
112 AerorobNZ : I'm not happy about all the opportunity of the nonticketed pax to get up in arms at me at the gate when their loved ones are slightly delayed, or when
113 Luketenley : They are making us get all new badges at PIT now with ESCORT and NON- ESCORT marks on them. Employees now have to have a red badge to have ESCORT priv
114 AirframeAS : Sorry, but its reality! Never said it was 'my' playground. Did I say it was? No. Its a place of business, period. NOT a playground. Please dont put w
115 VHXLR8 : In Australia, non-travellers can go through security and into the concourse (domestic terminals). The idea of stopping this came up after Sept 11; th
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...
USA: Non-tickd Pax Be Allowed Back To Gates? posted Wed Jun 8 2005 08:49:33 by Soundtrack
When Will Virgin Blue Get To Go To Ansett Gates? posted Sat Jun 15 2002 03:47:45 by Pilottim747
Milton To Let Air Collinette Go Broke? posted Mon Dec 10 2001 01:55:06 by Cmm340
Aviation Security Bill-Non Pax To Gates? posted Mon Nov 19 2001 19:47:10 by 727LOVER
FRA - LH Lounges - Which One To Go To? posted Sun Dec 3 2006 18:10:39 by Ansett767
F9 Non-Rev Loads To LAX posted Thu Oct 19 2006 04:27:12 by CO767FA
How To Go To LHR Cheap On Dec 25th? posted Fri Sep 29 2006 12:40:58 by NewYorkCityBoi
RUMOR: B6 May Convert Some 320 Deliveries To 319's posted Mon Sep 25 2006 02:18:38 by JerseyGuy
Ex-TWA CV880 To Go To Museum? posted Fri Aug 4 2006 14:24:14 by Duke
Aibus A380 And A340 Where Did They Go To? posted Sat Jul 29 2006 02:07:52 by 50watt
Aviation Security Bill-Non Pax To Gates? posted Mon Nov 19 2001 19:47:10 by 727LOVER
Boeing Completes 1,000th 777, Will Go To Emirates posted Sat Mar 3 2012 11:31:04 by gothamspotter
Why Did Delta Stop Non-stop Flights To AMM? posted Fri Nov 11 2011 20:58:26 by liftsifter
Ex-Tiger A320 To Go To Royal Brunei posted Wed Nov 9 2011 02:46:47 by fauzi
Do "Chinese" A320s Only Go To Chinese Airlines? posted Tue Oct 18 2011 10:40:19 by speedmarque
Could Embraer Or Canadair Go To The Large Jet? posted Tue May 18 2010 05:02:00 by c5load
China Airlines Launches Non Stop A340 To London! posted Thu Apr 29 2010 22:36:09 by BalkantoDelta