Airliners.net

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?

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

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!

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.

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

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 . . .

  

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.)

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

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.

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

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!!!

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

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...

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.

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

PIT does not do it.

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?

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.

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.

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 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.

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 23): 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.

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 checkpoints) is LAX, and LAX was designed with the idea that people could go through to the gate to both pick up and drop off relatives. Now, there is almost no seating or concessions landside, other than in Bradley where you have always needed a ticket to go through and T2 where the airport's second busiest FIS is (even that is only a Starbucks).

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 your pocket or that huge belt buckle will set off the metal detector. More people like this will only bog down the security lines. If you're going to do this, at least have a premium security line at every airport so that those who know the drill don't get slowed down even further.

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 blocking everyone behind them from exiting! You haven't seen her in years, 10 MORE SECONDS ISN'T GOING TO KILL YOU!

But the TSA has other stuff to straighten out first before they even think about something like that. As a pilot who is current with TWO airlines (Hey TSA, that means TWO separate background checks!!) I see no reason why I need to be on the no-fly list, yet there I am........

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 through out a concourse, taking the odd pic and people watching (int'l airports in particular are probably the best places I can think of to sit down and let the world walk by). However as someone who flies quite frequently I know how aggravating it is to queue up in those damned security lines. Some airports are better than others, still no less frustrating getting stuck by the 'once-a-year' flier who holds up the works when their car keys or loose change sets off the alarm. At the end of the day, I suppose I would have to give the TSA's test a big    . As annoying as the current system is, it can only get worse if non-passengers are allowed into the gate areas, imo.

Thomas

Quoting VEEREF (Reply 27): As a pilot who is current with TWO airlines (Hey TSA, that means TWO separate background checks!!)

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 in the US. That can get you terminated! I remember in all of the 3 airlines Ive worked for, I was required to sign a memorandum of understanding (a personal contract between YOU and the air carrier) that I was not allowed to work for the competition, if I am found in breach of it, I can get terminated.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 13): 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.

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 an x-ray image of a bag.
4. Anyone goes to ruch a cockpit, and they're pretty much dead these days, no one is going to sit back and ask a highjacker "what do you want?" anymore.

It was policy, not proceedures that led to 9/11. Time for TSA to go away.

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 shouldnt be hard at all.

I mean the terrorist all had paid tickets didnt they?

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 airside to hang out, eat, shop, etc, I dont have anything with me other than my wallet, keys and cellphone. I stick them into a bin, get them on the other side of the WTMD and I'm done. I know my shoes will go through fine, so thats about it (I'll wear slippers if I have to!).

Now granted that my home airport is LAS (2nd O&D in America, behind LAX), I'd be careful about what times I choose to visit the airport (non-peak hours of course), but the lines during peak will be enough to intimidate those who want to go airside and got there just before their friend deplanes. They'll hang out around the baggage carrousel and not deal with the hassle.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 29): 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 in the US. That can get you terminated! I remember in all of the 3 airlines Ive worked for, I was required to sign a memorandum of understanding (a personal contract between YOU and the air carrier) that I was not allowed to work for the competition, if I am found in breach of it, I can get terminated

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 of both company policies. I am an F/O for my current carrier and continue as sim instructor/check airman for the former.

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 and we had no worries about the sorts of things that happen today. I don't agree with it today, except in special cases. The lines are long enough at the security

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10): I'm sure the airports are pushing for this rule change to maximize revenue,

Bingo!! We have a winner! Some airports are reporting revenue losses because most of their concessions are "airside"--near the gates. They want to give people who aren't flying access to them--to get them to spend.
Louis Miller, who runs Tampa International Airport is quoted as saying he opposes the idea, and there's no need for it. TIA, he says, has adequate
concessions on both sides of security. (In fact, the TGIF "landside"makes more money than any other in the chain)
TPAnx

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 goodbye to relatives, not to mention great photo opportunities  

I don't remember any long lines or crowding before 9/11 when it was allowed.

Quoting MiCorazonAzul (Thread starter): Security lines are long as is, I can't imagine how much WORSE it will be if this goes through.

Perfectly put - my opinion exactly!

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 restrictions are the airport stores past the check-points that lost an incredible amount of sales post 9/11. Pittsburgh International, with arguably the best Air Mall in the U.S. is going to be looking at this test program praying that it becomes permanent.

When Pittsburgh's Air Mall opened (hyperbole or not) there were news reports of a few people missing their flights because they were distracted shopping. Sounds like my wife.
http://flypittsburgh.com/AirportGuid...vlet?action=airside&catagory=shops

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, and other services inside sercurity, while a lot simply do not, and are crowded as is.

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 flights at peak times when security is bad enough already.

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 flights at peak times when security is bad enough already.

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 background checks and screening, they will be allowed into the terminal area to shop and dine. Same thing at DFW. It's just too bad the rest of us won't be allowed to, unless we're departing or arriving.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll.../612080444&SearchID=73265441449933

Quoting Galapagapop (Reply 39): 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, and other services inside sercurity, while a lot simply do not, and are crowded as is.

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-travellers be allowed back in, but I'll wait to see how the test program does before I really support it - how much it affects the security lines is the critical factor.

-Mir

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 with that. The security lines are already very long and slow and by having non-fliers needing to go through the security checkpoints it would just make the lines worse especially for people who are running late they have a greater chance of missing their flight. The second biggest problem would be the crowds at the gates. There's no need for extra people hanging around at the gates.

-DeltaJet757

Quoting N1120A (Reply 18): Why? It worked fine before 9/11

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 liquid whatever, etc . . . every pax has to go through this cluster . . . and now you advocate allowing another thousand people or so an hour that access as well? THat's insane.

Seen the lines at ATL lately? And you wanna virtually double, perhaps triple them, so Mary Jane Rottencrotch can see Tommy Tentpeg off on a business trip?

Silliness . . .

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 23): 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?

Do NOT underestimate the assininity of the American Public.

Quoting VEEREF (Reply 27): As a pilot who is current with TWO airlines (Hey TSA, that means TWO separate background checks!!) I see no reason why I need to be on the no-fly list, yet there I am........

   Yup, ridiculous. TSA/DHS at it's finest.

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 the flying passengers for the expense of new security equipment on airports?

Non flyers would benefit
Flyers would benefit
Airport would benefit
Jobs would be created

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 have a tradition here at LAX of picking up family and friends after a flight. (IIRC, at LAX more people are picked up by friends/family than any other airport) Since traffic is so bad in the city, it was wonderfull being near the gate (but far enough away not to cause traffic) as they arrived. When I first had my driver's license, it was quite a thrill to go to the airport to pick up grandma and other family members.  

But as a flier... ugh... I cannot imagine the lines that would result. T1 at LAX anyone?    I couldn't care less about the concessions. Rebuild the airport properly (hint, WEST terminal).

Airports would have to be completely rebuilt to handle this... I'm so sure the NIMBYs would approve... NOT!

Sadly, this is an idea that must be shot while young.

Lightsaber

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 45): Seen the lines at ATL lately?

Unfortunately, I get to see them every 3 weeks. ATL security checkpoint is horribly disorganized. They really ought to have more checkpoints.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 5): 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 . . .

However with added people to process, it might make them more efficient?