tioloko100 From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 88 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2861 times:
IATA boss is advocating a more intelligent approach that would direct passengers to one of three dedicated lines or ‘security tunnels’ based on a number of different factors.
I would love that as i can be able to breeze in and out and it would limit the "harassment" from airport security staff that are closed minded and first class airlines like EK already help their gold card holders to get on the fast lanes. i pray its introduced
UALFAson From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 590 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2695 times:
The U.S. version of "Conde Nast Traveler" magazine mentioned this and included some illustrations as part of an article on the future of airport security they ran a few months back.
Unfortunately, I think they're going to be years away (can't remember how far along the technology actually is at this point). First off, airports, at least here in the U.S., have just spent billions of dollars buying two versions of body scanner machines and installing them. I don't think there's going to be a lot of desire to spend even more money on new machines and remodel security areas again.
Secondly, while the idea is good in theory, it will represent a complete change in approach/philosophy to airport security since it was introduced in the 60s? 70s? The segregated lanes are discrimination lawsuits waiting to happen and I think there will be a lot of skepticism among the public that just walking through a tunnel can provide the same level of security as metal detectors, bag X-rays, etc.
Not to be a Negative Nancy and rain on your parade, tho!
"We hope you've enjoyed flying with us as much as we've enjoyed taking you for a ride."
Polot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 1591 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2547 times:
Quoting UALFAson (Reply 1): The segregated lanes are discrimination lawsuits waiting to happen and I think there will be a lot of skepticism among the public that just walking through a tunnel can provide the same level of security as metal detectors, bag X-rays, etc.
The "tunnel" is just a metaphor, people are not actually walking through tunnels lol. Everyone would still have to go through metal detectors and have their bags X-rayed. It sounds like that "known travelers" just won't have to remove laptops from bags, take off their shoes etc.
IAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4740 posts, RR: 25 Reply 3, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2442 times:
Maybe something like the TSA and airline Pre-Check? Pre-Check certainly puts the security process at high speed compared to those not able to use Pre-Check.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16936 posts, RR: 57 Reply 5, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2334 times:
Quoting UALFAson (Reply 1): The segregated lanes are discrimination lawsuits waiting to happen
How so? Segregation would be purely on voluntary terms (the passenger's willingness to furning background information to the TSA/DHS, frequency of flight, some such thing). None of these criteria constitute a legally protectes class (like race, creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, etc.)
That's like filing a discrimination suit because you weren't permitted to sit in F class on your Y ticket.
skywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 166 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1897 times:
Quoting UALFAson (Reply 1): The segregated lanes are discrimination lawsuits waiting to happen
And the infamous No Fly List isn't? For all its faults, and I am by no means singing its praises, it has withstood all challenges to date. That alone woud not be a factor in DHS/TSA using them.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5): That's like filing a discrimination suit because you weren't permitted to sit in F class on your Y ticket.
Bingo! Participate or don't, up to you. Still think TSA Pre Check should be cheaper to opt into though.
skywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 166 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1635 times:
Anyone can join for $100 by enrolling in Global Entry from Customs and Immigration. So chosen as you point out is merely the cost of the ticket, so really free to join. I feel any American citizen with no criminal record should be able to enroll at minimal cost and I don't consider $100 minimal. Mine was paid by American Express but I don't consider that card a minimal expense either.
UA reimbursed my $100, but even if they didn't my time over the year of flying is worth more than $100 when able to use Pre-Check for domestic for Global Entry for international trips.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
skywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 166 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (5 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1475 times:
For now the Trusted Traveller/TSA Pre Check/Whatever it's called in other countries is the exception. It's a big step in the right direction but unfortunately the current state of airport security is well obnoxious at best. It wasn't all that good in recent years before the body scanner but I don't feel we should have to pay $100 to skip having our nether regions X-rayed or fondled to board an aircraft. Maybe to always be first in line but not to be a trusted traveller.
UALFAson From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 590 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1391 times:
Quoting Polot (Reply 2): The "tunnel" is just a metaphor, people are not actually walking through tunnels lol.
No, according to the article and illustration in "Conde Nast Traveler," they are actually tunnels, like 20-foot long body scanners. They have sensors in the floor that check your shoes, puff air at you as you walk by, scan for metal, etc. The whole point of them is that you don't have to undress and take your bag apart--you just walk through them fully dressed with all your stuff.
The idea would be that there are several of these set to varying levels of sensitivity and passengers would be "randomly" selected to go through various tunnels. I am guessing registered frequent travelers would always been sent through the fastest/least sensitive lane. My comment about the lawsuit is if they start "randomly" sending all dark-skinned (and I'll leave that to your interpretation) passengers through or people perceive that to at least be the case.
"We hope you've enjoyed flying with us as much as we've enjoyed taking you for a ride."
Polot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 1591 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1364 times:
Quoting UALFAson (Reply 11): No, according to the article and illustration in "Conde Nast Traveler," they are actually tunnels, like 20-foot long body scanners. They have sensors in the floor that check your shoes, puff air at you as you walk by, scan for metal, etc. The whole point of them is that you don't have to undress and take your bag apart--you just walk through them fully dressed with all your stuff.
So then they are still going through metal detectors and having their bags x-rayed, just in a different looking package. And lets be honest, if this were to be implemented most airports would likely use separate lines with existing equipment versus spending money on new 20 ft long scanners that from your description would cost probably a couple million dollars apiece.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 88 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 590 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jul 2011, 214 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
