Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
acidradio
Topic Author
Posts: 1595
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 3:19 pm

"Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:59 pm

City Pages in Minneapolis recently published an interesting interview with security consultant Bruce Schneier. Basically he calls most of what the TSA does "security theater". While reinforcing cockpit doors and teaching the public to fight back in a hijacking have benefited security greatly, he feels that increased sky marshals is "on the fence." The rest of it is mostly for show.

http://citypages.com/databank/28/1394/article15776.asp
Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
 
DLOnur
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:56 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 2:02 pm

Nothing new here.

The TSA folks are nothing but theater, and they are bad actors/actresses.....
What you believe is what you see.
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:54 pm

When one chooses to go to the press with criticisms that aren't backed by any better alternatives, then that is pure theater.

This guy suggests that what the TSA does serves no purposes other than to address our collective fears about terrorism. If that is the case, then following his logic, we should be able to remove the secuirty check in its entirety and we would be just as safe - no more no less. But we know darn well what would happen if there were no security checks - there would be hijackings left, right, and center - just as there were before the security checks were instituted way back when.

While he may have a point that the TSA could be improved, his theatrical approach of over exaggeration as a mere facade over no substantive suggestions, causes his message to be lost - he ends up looking looney instead of insightful.

And personally, I have been through TSA lines maybe 500 times in the past 6 years. And I have never ever had a bad experience with any TSA agent. I have seen a few (lmaybe two or three) odd incidents where the person going through the line has tried to get away with something and then has gotten all upset when caught, but that is it.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:35 pm

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
This guy suggests that what the TSA does serves no purposes other than to address our collective fears about terrorism. If that is the case, then following his logic, we should be able to remove the secuirty check in its entirety and we would be just as safe - no more no less.

That is close to being true. The thing that I think you're missing is that 9/11 permanently altered the feasibility of hijacking an airplane in the US. Pre-9/11, a hijacking was a hostage taking for the purposes of getting somewhere or having some demands met. The safest course of action was to comply with the hijackers and get the plane on the ground where the authorities could deal with the situation.

9/11 was the first time that hostages had nothing to do with it...the hijackers wanted the plane, not the people as bargaining chips. In that environment, there is no safety value to capitulating to the hijacker's demands. Post 9/11, you can't hijack an airplane in the US because 1) you can't get in the cockpit and 2) the passengers will attack, subdue, and possibly kill you because they're afraid you're going to kill all of them anyway.

There is still value to making sure people don't bring weapons on the plane (real weapons...not butter knives and hair gel), which is what the old pre-9/11 security screening did fairly nicely. So I don't advocate getting rid of airport security entirely, but if we reverted to pre-9/11 security we'd be just as safe as we are today, without all the inane hassle.

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
And I have never ever had a bad experience with any TSA agent.

I haven't either, but the agents themselves aren't the problem. They're doing the job they were asked to do as best they can. The problem is that they were asked to do a stupid and unnecessary job that costs an enormous amount of money, inconveniences an enormous number of people, and has little to no value.

Tom.
 
ACFA
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:41 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 7:01 pm

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 3):
Post 9/11, you can't hijack an airplane in the US because 1) you can't get in the cockpit and 2) the passengers will attack, subdue, and possibly kill you because they're afraid you're going to kill all of them anyway.

Never say never. Post 9/11 hijackings do happen, and these airlines have re-inforced cockpit doors as well. Qantas had one a few years back where the purser ended up being stabbed. Also I believe Turkish Airlines just had another one these past few weeks. Where there is a will, there is a way.
 
georgiaame
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:55 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 7:52 pm

Security is just that. And I feel absolutely no sense of being secure knowing that I am in a crush of humanity, not paying attention to surroundings because of the anxiety involved in checking in to a flight: To whit: is my suitcase too heavy? Will it arrive? Will I remember where I parked? What if it rains? Why is checking taking so long? Will I miss the flight trying to get through "security".

During those 10-30 minutes between my car door and my gin and tonic behind the secure area, I, and thousands like me, are sitting ducks for a massacre of unbelievable magnitude. All this prior to our government paid, union work rule abiding, ever break taking TSA experts dilligently search for four ounces of hair gel I wouldn't be caught dead wearing.

And we the sitting (flying?) public have complacently allowed this theater of the absurd to happen. We are damned lucky the massacre I am predicting has never happened! (And yes, there is a precedent for one-Tel Aviv if you google it)
"Trust, but verify!" An old Russian proverb, quoted often by a modern American hero
 
peh
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:29 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:08 pm

Quoting ACFA (Reply 4):
Qantas had one a few years back where the purser ended up being stabbed.

This was one crazy dude. He got on board with two sharp wooden spikes. He tried to take control of the plane because God had asked him to crash it into the forests of Tasmania where the Devil lived.

This case, however, doesn't support your argument ACFA (sorry). In this case, the flight attendant, an extremely brave man named Greg Khan, subdued the guy. He was supported by fellow staff and passengers who strapped the guy into a seat and watched him like a hawk.

When interviewed by TV journalists later that day Khan said that the only thing going through his mind was "that guy's not getting into the cockpit".

I agree with your statement, though - Never say never.
Flown: ATR72, DASH 8, 737, 747, 767, 777, A300, A320, A321, A330, A340, MD80
 
aajfksjubklyn
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:46 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:38 pm

I thought the TSA was a rap group...Well atleast in LaGuardia, JFK and Newark. Elswhere the appear better.
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:00 pm

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
This guy suggests that what the TSA does serves no purposes other than to address our collective fears about terrorism. If that is the case, then following his logic, we should be able to remove the security check in its entirety and we would be just as safe - no more no less. But we know darn well what would happen if there were no security checks - there would be hijackings left, right, and center - just as there were before the security checks were instituted way back when.

I strongly doubt this. There have been enough tests of the current "security theater" that simple journalists were able to bring enough arms into the plane, about 10% were detected only, 90% slip through. Even doubling the controls again would only challenge the intelligence of hijackers. Hijackers who do not mind their own lives laugh on these controls, they just are little challenges for them.
Number of hijacks never was large, if you substract the events where people just wanted to flee from their countries, there was a handful organized by Libyan Secret Service and El Fatah in the 70th.

On the other hand the frustrations and anger created by the official terror of the state "security" systems against every innocent passenger feeds terrorism - terror is the result of politics and only can be ended by changing politics, not by police control or military.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14908
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:02 pm

Quoting GeorgiaAME (Reply 5):
During those 10-30 minutes between my car door and my gin and tonic behind the secure area, I, and thousands like me, are sitting ducks for a massacre of unbelievable magnitude. All this prior to our government paid, union work rule abiding, ever break taking TSA experts diligently search for four ounces of hair gel I wouldn't be caught dead wearing.

And we the sitting (flying?) public have complacently allowed this theater of the absurd to happen. We are damned lucky the massacre I am predicting has never happened! (And yes, there is a precedent for one-Tel Aviv if you google it)

That happened at the main airport in Rome, Italy near the ElAl counters back in the mid-1980's. I worked with someone who was near that area when it happened. IIRC, several people were killed. There was also several years ago, post 9/11 on the 4th of July of a guy with a gun shooting up people at the counters at International terminal at LAX. If the Glasgow Airport bombers could have got through the doors, their vehicle and the fire from their fizzling bomb or if the bomb had worked, could have killed a number of people.

Yes, most of the USA's TSA is a theater group doing a farce type of play, but that airport theater is surprisingly effective and important. It can and does make it unpredictable what the TSA is watching for that day, it does react to potential threats, it has probably has discouraged a number of terror acts from pros and phonies. Could it be better, of course, but it would make the security jams a lot worse or get into Constitution issues or make prices go up, all of which would create more pressure to politicians to back off some real security.
 
georgiaame
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:55 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:30 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 9):
Could it be better, of course, but it would make the security jams a lot worse or get into Constitution issues or make prices go up, all of which would create more pressure to politicians to back off some real security.

This does not alter the fact that in reality, there is no such thing as security in US airports. Airports are not secure places to be in! Let me put it another way: Suppose you are caught in a very heavy, driving rainstorm (fat chance of that happening here in Atlanta). Would you feel safer sitting in your car in an open parking deck OUTSIDE the terminal, or would you rather seek shelter INSIDE the terminal, close to the crowds waiting to go through security?

The pre security clearance jam up points have made us infinitely LESS safe than before 9/11. We are better, easier targets today, and the crowds get bigger by the day, especially around 4PM. And there are more deaths on the highways as a direct result of people not flying shorter routes, and instead chosing to drive to business locations rather than deal with the hassles that were put in place supposedly to save these people in the first place! Deaths of hundreds that were preventable if an air-head on the US payroll hadn't dreampt up this "security" scheme up in the first place!.

The moderator is not going to like this posting!
"Trust, but verify!" An old Russian proverb, quoted often by a modern American hero
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:55 pm

Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 7):
I thought the TSA was a rap group...

No that's NWA Silly

Quoting DLOnur (Reply 1):
The TSA folks are nothing but theater

After working with them for four years, I can confidently say I've never met less intelligent, more incompetent people in my life, from top to bottom. I can't even think of a word to describe how completely useless and absolutely devoid of any rational thought processes they are.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 1:10 am

From a guy who spent nearly a decade in the airline industry:

TSA's security is a good try, but none-the-less very much more show than go. We privatize them, give them a government sanctioned agency to work for and give them a raise. So what? Unless you up the anty on their training and perfomance to match the rest, their still just rent a cops, albeit high paid ones. And to top it off, if you start with mediocrity and just saturate your force with more mediocrity, what do end up with? More people still doing the same mediocre job. There's just more of them. That's all. And there's no standardization from one airport to the next.

There's no miracle answer to this security problem. Unless you completely militarize our airport security system, we are just stuck with what we have.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 2:20 am

Are you guys nuts?
In the USA we are DAMNED lucky that in general most people to not want to die and want to lead a good life. We have it pretty darn good here. And arguing the we are not safe because of the stack up outside security? Jeez Louise, come on! Anyone can be killed at anytime in the US by a determined person! They could go to a mall, a movie theatre, a sports event (now THERE's security!), an office building, a post office, a military base, a bridge, tunnel.... should I go on? We are lucky cuz Iraq shows us just how easy it is to blow up anything, how hard it is to prevent it. ANd what becomes of society when that happen (the viscious circle of "you hurt me/my family and now I will hurt you more). We would become a police state if you wanted to have absolute security.

Fortunately for the civilized world things are good enough in society that people are not so dissatisfied that they want to end their own lives and take the lives of others. Basic security is needed, vigilance, is needed, support of police and reasonable rules and regulations are needed. If the public does not support this then it will all fail because we do not live in a police state.

I support good basic security and while improvements can definitely be made I think most of the problem comes from the fact the public does not take it very seriously and that leaves the TSA to have to discern the "normal people" from those of ill intent. Not easy to do if you ask me. Most people here probably don't have a problem with security because we know what to do, what rules to follow, and therefore don't get hassled. But we all have to deal with the long lines because the TSA is busy running people though the process multiple times to find the big belt buckle, the cell phone, the stupid shampoo, the argumentative passenger who says "I don't have to do that". It sure as hell ain't perfect that's for sure and could definitely use improvement (a lot) but if everybody paid attention like most of us here do (generalizing) then the attention could be better focused of the real problems.

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
N908AW
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:09 am

"Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

How do we know that? Big grin
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:12 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 13):
and that leaves the TSA to have to discern the "normal people" from those of ill intent. Not easy to do if you ask me.

It's not easy, but it is easier if you've been properly trained. Cops do it every day.

[Edited 2007-08-24 20:13:22]
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:19 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 13):
Basic security is needed, vigilance, is needed, support of police and reasonable rules and regulations are needed. If the public does not support this then it will all fail because we do not live in a police state.

Agreed. That's the point. As a nation we holler and moan and complain. But when it comes time to actually enact a solution or merely suggest a solution, we clam up. No one wants to live in a police state, agreed. But we aren't really ready to sacrifice in order to get real security either. It's just like the automotive world. We want more gas mileage out of our cars but aren't willing to sacrifice the horsepower to get it... leaving us with our suv's and V8's...
 
AF340
Posts: 2267
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:57 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:07 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
No that's NWA

Hahaha!!  laughing   laughing   laughing   laughing   laughing 
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:23 am

Quoting ACFA (Reply 4):
Never say never. Post 9/11 hijackings do happen, and these airlines have re-inforced cockpit doors as well. Qantas had one a few years back where the purser ended up being stabbed. Also I believe Turkish Airlines just had another one these past few weeks. Where there is a will, there is a way.

Uhmm, dude...you really got to re-read what Tdscanuck said in reply 3. He was talking about within the U.S; not worldwide.

There is a difference between a hijacking vs. taking over a plane to prove a point without thinking of other people's safety and killing everyone.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:26 am

Quoting AirTran717 (Reply 15):
It's not easy, but it is easier if you've been properly trained. Cops do it every day.

Can't disagree with you there and somehow I missed your post just before mine. If we were to make them "real" officers like ICE or BP then we would get much better people. But I don't know, would YOU want to be a professional TSA "officer" knowing what you would have to put up with day in a day out? I am pretty sure that if I were inclined to be law enforcement I would join one of the other agencies before ever thinking about TSA.

So the question would be: How do we change that? Is it just the money and training? The training would be relatively easy, you could simply integrate it into one of the other forces training programs like many agencies do already. The money aspect would be harder but just like most other airports ops charges/fees could be emplaced to pay for it but I know that would create many howls of protest.

As several here have stated complaining is useless, come up with a viable solution. Otherwise shut up. And we probably know more about the situation and problems than most people (no certainly not everything). Let the discussion and solutions begin.

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:29 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 19):
But I don't know, would YOU want to be a professional TSA "officer" knowing what you would have to put up with day in a day out?

Sure. I was a flight attendant for 8 years, putting up with crap every day.

Actually, no. I'm very happy in my new career, in medical coding. Operative notes and insurance claims don't talk back and the money is incredible.
 
brilondon
Posts: 3077
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:00 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
After working with them for four years, I can confidently say I've never met less intelligent, more incompetent people in my life, from top to bottom. I can't even think of a word to describe how completely useless and absolutely devoid of any rational thought processes they are.

The biggest farce I think is the X-ray machine and its operator. They have no clue as to what they are looking for or what they are looking at. Right after 9/11 they installed the machines to calm public fears about the security. The guns and bombs they are looking for would not be labeled bomb or gun and can be easily made to look innocent in someones luggage.
Rush forever Closer To My Heart
 
airtran717
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:48 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:06 am

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 21):
The guns and bombs they are looking for would not be labeled bomb or gun and can be easily made to look innocent in someones luggage.

That's not necessarily true either. No, you are right, they would not be labeled. But if you are properly trained... gee, I see a pattern here... you would easily know what to look for. But the training is the crux of all of this. In my eight years as a flight attendant, I've seen many an airport security line. And from what I've seen, the training is most definitely not there. Remember, this is a government run agency. They always talk a good game. But politics is politics.
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:26 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 11):
Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 7):
I thought the TSA was a rap group...

No that's NWA

No, no, no...NWA is an airline. TSA is the Tourette Syndrome Association, which explains the odd outbursts and foul language we sometime hear around the security checkpoints.  gnasher 
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
User avatar
malaysia
Posts: 2656
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:34 am

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 21):
The biggest farce I think is the X-ray machine and its operator. They have no clue as to what they are looking for or what they are looking at.

I just had my first TSA dream last night, I was planning to go on a nice non rev trip, I go to the check point and I put my bag on this x-ray but apparently it was broken up (the protective covers were missing) it was an open MRI and we all were getting exposed to radiation, and the operators were just sitting there and going on as usual... I was like oh no, then after I exit the screening area, a Supervisor comes and finally deems that xray lane is dangerous and unsafe, so just says stop operating that xray. I can wonder how my mind developed this dream based on how the TSA is in reality.
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
 
aviateur
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:25 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:40 am

I interviewed Bruce Schneier a few times for some of my columns at Salon. He was gracious to lend quotes and/or offer insights on each occasion, and I'll include some links to the pieces below. I would strongly recommend Schneier's book "Beyond Fear."

Bruce Schneier should be running TSA. Alas, that job belongs to Kip Hawley. Schneie recently interviewed Hawley on his blog site. The Kipper came across basically as a handcuffed bureaucrat. A smart guy, but effectively powerless and beholden to the larger system in which he and his agency are trapped. That is, the current government and its doctrine of fear.

Here are the articles Bruce contributed to. You can read any of these for free....


Seat pocket rummagings: TSA alert, Skybus, Delta livery, Marine Air Terminal
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2007/08/10/askthepilot240/

Mashed potatoes, tomato sauce, and national security:
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/11/22/askthepilot210/

How Ziploc bags help keep America safe:
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/10/27/askthepilot206/

The London liquid bombers: imminent threat or a trumped-up ruse?
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/09/15/askthepilot201/

September 11th anniversary -- security madness and the state of the industry
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/09/06/airline_security/

Letter from Tel Aviv. Is the Israeli model of security right for America?
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/06/09/askthepilot189/

Airport security's dirty little secret
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...05/06/10/askthepilot140/index.html
Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
 
nzrich
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:51 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:44 am

Quoting Peh (Reply 6):

This was one crazy dude. He got on board with two sharp wooden spikes. He tried to take control of the plane because God had asked him to crash it into the forests of Tasmania where the Devil lived.

This case, however, doesn't support your argument ACFA (sorry). In this case, the flight attendant, an extremely brave man named Greg Khan, subdued the guy. He was supported by fellow staff and passengers who strapped the guy into a seat and watched him like a hawk.

Yes this guy was crazy .. Unfortunately you just dont know what one crazy guy can do !!! Especially these days with people high on P etc etc ..Luckily in that incident the guy was calmed down and watched like a hawk but it could easily have ended up with a different outcome ..
"Pride of the pacific"
 
sllevin
Posts: 3314
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:49 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 3):
The thing that I think you're missing is that 9/11 permanently altered the feasibility of hijacking an airplane in the US. Pre-9/11, a hijacking was a hostage taking for the purposes of getting somewhere or having some demands met.

I agree...I compare it to bank robberies.

Right now, people are told "do whatever they want, give them the money, let them leave"

If bank robbers started killing people after taking the money, people's actions would change, I think  Smile

Steve
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:51 am

Quoting Aviateur (Reply 25):
Bruce Schneier should be running TSA



Quoting Aviateur (Reply 25):
The Kipper came across basically as a handcuffed bureaucrat. A smart guy, but effectively powerless and beholden to the larger system in which he and his agency are trapped. That is, the current government and its doctrine of fear.

I suspect that Bruce would find himself similarly handcuffed. The government always gets wrapped up by the special interests and bureaucracy.

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 21):
The biggest farce I think is the X-ray machine and its operator. They have no clue as to what they are looking for or what they are looking at.

Wouldn't it make sense to have multiple people review xray images? That way you could have people specially trained to find certain types of material or items each looking for what they are trained for. You could do it live from a remote site with direct communications to the airport.

Of course then they might outsource it to India.....  Yeah sure

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:59 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
And personally, I have been through TSA lines maybe 500 times in the past 6 years. And I have never ever had a bad experience with any TSA agent. I have seen a few (lmaybe two or three) odd incidents where the person going through the line has tried to get away with something and then has gotten all upset when caught, but that is it.

You've been lucky.

On June 3rd, a screener at SFO decided to smash objects in my wife's carry-on bag. I then asked the supervisor for complaint forms and was told there was no such thing. When I insisted on filing a complaint, the supervisor threatened to arrest me.

Two times, I've had screeners attempt to read the instructions on the smokehood I carry. In both cases, I finally realized that they were functionally illiterate. In both cases, I had to insist that they get a supervisor.

Baggage screeners have ripped the "TSA compliant" locks off my checked luggage numerous times, usually destroying the zipper too. When I called TSA to complain, they insist that it wasn't them.
 
PurdueAv2003
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 11:43 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:00 am

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 23):
TSA is the Tourette Syndrome Association, which explains the odd outbursts and foul language we sometime hear around the security checkpoints.

No, the foul language comes from us pax, not the the screeners!

I'm waiting for the TSA to finally relax the ridiculous ban on liquids. I travel with my infant daughter quite often. I have to dump out any liquid formula or water, but I can bring a cigarette lighter and an unmarked cannister containing a white powdery substance. Anyone care to explain that logic? Not to mention that if anyone wanted to carry these "liquid explosives" that the TSA is so concerned over, instead of one large container, he could fill several small ones and bring them in his ziploc bag!
Ptu = Ftu X Anet (not to be confused with a.net)
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:15 am

Quoting PurdueAv2003 (Reply 30):
I have to dump out any liquid formula or water,

That's not true anymore (and wasn't in place for very long either) so if someone is stopping you don't let them. A quick Googling shows that per the TSA:

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/children/formula.shtm

Quote:
If you are traveling with a baby or toddler baby formula, breast milk, and juice are allowed in your carry-on baggage or personal items. You can take these through the security checkpoints and aboard your plane. If you're not traveling with a baby or toddler, any formula, breast milk, or juice you're carrying must meet the requirements for carrying liquids, gels and aerosols (3-1-1). Click here to learn more about 3-1-1.

When carrying formula, breast milk, or juice through the checkpoint, they will be inspected, however, you or your baby or toddler will not be asked to test or taste breast milk, formula, or juice. Our Security Officers may test liquid exemptions (exempt items more than 3 ounces) for explosives.

When traveling with a child, in the absence of suspicious activity or items, greater than 3 ounces of baby formula, breast milk, or juice are permitted through the security checkpoint in reasonable quantities for the duration of your itinerary, if you perform the following:

1. Separate these items from the liquids, gels, and aerosols in your quart-size and zip-top bag.
2. Declare you have the items to one of our Security Officers at the security checkpoint.
3. Present these items for additional inspection once reaching the X-ray. These items are subject to additional screening.

You are encouraged to travel with only as much formula, breast milk, or juice in your carry-on needed to reach your destination.

You are allowed to bring gel or liquid-filled teethers, canned, jarred, or processed baby food in your carry-on baggage and aboard your plane.

For information on creams, medicines, or other essential items for your child, please read our guidance on these items. Click here for the list of permitted and prohibited items.

Liquids and gels, including baby formula, breast milk, or juice, may be packed in your luggage and checked with your airline.

After clearing security, travelers can now bring beverages and other items purchased in the secure boarding area on-board aircraft.

For more details on navigating the screening process with your children, please read our information on traveling with children.

Just FYI. (Print the page and hand it to them if someone tries to give you grief.)

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
sphealey
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:42 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
When one chooses to go to the press with criticisms that aren't backed by any better alternatives, then that is pure theater.

Bruce has been appointed to at least one, and possibly more, Homeland Security/Transportation Advisory Committees. AFAIK he has never revealed the details of the committee for which he did the most work, but he has stated that he resigned because none of the advice or proposals that he or any of the experienced security experts advanced even came close to being adopted.

sPh
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:01 am

Interesting, this is about to fall of the front page, which as we all know is usually the death of the thread. It dies with a question in my mind: Why don't we discuss this and come up with solutions? We all complain about it, we all hate the lines, the false power of what people here have called "glorified rent-a-cops", and the fact that we don't it gives any real security.

So what is the answer to this? Do we care and do we have the knowledge to recommend meaningful changes that will bring us effective changes to the airport security process? What will the cost be and what cost is worth? We all know that another major act of destruction via an airplane will cause umpteen billion dollars worth of damage to the industry. Will cause "X" number of airlines to fail and increase the consumer costs of travel.

What is security worth?
I say it is worth at least a direct charge of $20 per passenger per ticket to hire and train a professional force of well trained sufficiently staffed people that can provide us with a faster and better experience at the airport. The hard part would be keeping the money where it belongs, government has a tendency to drain "excess monies" from well funded programs (gee where has does that happen already for aviation?).

What is good, effective security?
Here is the hard part, it means putting all the money and people to good use in a way that does not just create bureaucracy and "politico" jobs (a favorite pastime of government) and waste money. I have already suggested one way is to use more remote and offsite opportunities like for baggage screening. But what about pre-screening? what about profiling? I don't have a good answer here. I hope maybe people here do.

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
WPIAeroGuy
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:52 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:10 am

Well I've been reading for long enough its time to make my first post...

I think Tugger makes an excellent point in that we should try and come with a new security scheme. A few thoughts that I have..

1> I don't know what the TSA is actually trained to look for. How much "profiling" do they use, whether by training or just natural instinct. Every time I go through security I've never taken off my belt, despite it having a fairly hefty metal buckle. This could mean three things- either the TSA/metal detector is really good and know that its just a belt buckle-or- they look at me and realize I'm just a poor college kid going to visit his girlfriend and I'm not a threat- or- the machine doesn't even detect it, and I walk on through. I'm gonna lean towards the third one.

2> All metal detectors should be removed. Any type of sword/blade/sharp weapon that can be made of metal can just as easily be made of glass or ceramic, or even plastic. In place of metal detectors should be particle/explosive detectors and trained dogs. You can have all the wires in the world but if there are no explosives, you're not gonna make a bomb. Now this brings me to a question: Can dogs detect gunpowder, because that would be just as effective at preventing guns on planes as an x-ray.

3> I remember reading a while back about a new device that uses whats called T-Rays. Its the same as an xray, but doesn't have any adverse affects towards humans. If that technology works out it will be a huge leap ahead for security everywhere. Something along the lines of this technology is what will be needed to improve and streamline security, right now the policy is "assume everything metal is a weapon, and everything a liquid a bomb".

4> Even with all that, I'm not really worried about something going on in the cabin. There's no terrorist who's going to commandeer a plane...read all the articles about crazy pax threatening to kill themselves and everyone else and they are always subdued. Put Sky Marshalls on the flight, give the FA's Tasers, more security on the plane will prevent hijacking.

5> Now about the cargo... how much is that screened? Here's an idea... anything powered by electricity will give off some sort of field, and produce some heat. If we could detect that, then we would have a way of either proves Joe Businessman left his laptop on, or if there is something else running that shouldn't be. Now obviously objects can be shielded, but this would show up on an X-Ray. Also, an infrared scan could show if a certain part of the bag was warmer than another, also leading to possible electronics. I'm not an ECE guy (ME/Aero) but I'm pretty sure that that technology is feasible.

6> All that being said, the scariest place is subways. No security (other than being told you can't take pictures), closed spaces, and running underneath major cities' infrastructure. I think the government is really lucky that they can have a kneejerk reaction to every attack or threat and make it safe, pretty soon they're going to have to think outside the box.

-WPIAeroGuy
-WPIAeroGuy
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Sun Aug 26, 2007 9:35 am

TSA tried to confiscate a Tinkerbell coffee mug out of my backpack Friday morning...

When I got into DFW I got to witness my favorite TSA goodie.. The person who guards the revolving door.. As usual, standing around talking on the phone completely ignoring their area of responsibility

You can imagine just how I'm feeling about their level of competence right about now.

The TSA needs immediate answerable oversight. The joke they are conducting right now is most certainly not security.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
B707321C
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:17 am

I have flow about 250 times in the US the last 10 months and am getting kind of familiar with TSA procedures, some of them making more sense than others. However, I am still surprised with a few practices in the US that I do not think would be allowed other places.

- Southwest and others have flight numbers with one or several stops, where continuing passengers are not required to leave the plane and then re-board later. With this practice, the crew will not know if hand luggage belongs to continuing passengers or was left behind by a non-continuing passenger. I think the cabin should be empty of passengers and luggage between each leg. Just as an extra check.

- On a recent WN flight from BWI-LAX, the plane returned to the gate before getting to the runway, due a sick passenger. The passenger was let off the plane, and 5 minutes later we took off. Here again, this passenger could have left something behind. I believe in EU, once the door is closed, no one gets off, unless an emergency. In this case everybody would have had to get off, and then re - board.


Changes these practices would at least have a real positive effect on security, but I guess it’s too costly--- and that what it all comes down to.
 
2175301
Posts: 1720
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:47 am

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
Well I've been reading for long enough its time to make my first post...

I think Tugger makes an excellent point in that we should try and come with a new security scheme. A few thoughts that I have..

1> I don't know what the TSA is actually trained to look for. How much "profiling" do they use, whether by training or just natural instinct. Every time I go through security I've never taken off my belt, despite it having a fairly hefty metal buckle. This could mean three things- either the TSA/metal detector is really good and know that its just a belt buckle-or- they look at me and realize I'm just a poor college kid going to visit his girlfriend and I'm not a threat- or- the machine doesn't even detect it, and I walk on through. I'm gonna lean towards the third one.

Metal detectors can be set on how sensitive they are. The best ones can set the sensitivities to different levels for different zones (feet lower legs/ mid body / upper body / head).

After 9/11 many airports set their metal detectors really sensitive - which is why belt buckles used to set them off. In recent years they have backed off on that due to the number of "nuisance" alarms.

The real, and initial purpose, of the metal detector was to detect handguns - which have a pretty solid mass of metal (and key parts cannot yet be made from non-metalic parts).

I have no problem screening for handguns. But also believe that certain people should be allowed concealed carry (even on airplanes). What many people do not know is that at least prior to 9/11 that with the pilots concurrence certain people routinely carried on flights (typically police or federal officers). I do not know the current status of that program.

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
2> All metal detectors should be removed. Any type of sword/blade/sharp weapon that can be made of metal can just as easily be made of glass or ceramic, or even plastic. In place of metal detectors should be particle/explosive detectors and trained dogs. You can have all the wires in the world but if there are no explosives, you're not gonna make a bomb. Now this brings me to a question: Can dogs detect gunpowder, because that would be just as effective at preventing guns on planes as an x-ray.

See above for my comments on metal detectors. Basic metal detection is quite fast. Does not require shoes or belts off, etc.

Concerning bomb detection. I do not believe that the TSA could find any well constructed bomb (that is constructed to avoid detection by the methods they use); and I am quite confident that I could build and take through any TSA security checkpoint such a bomb (and one large enough to clearly take a plane out of the sky). Outside of laboratories and some experimental equipment the technology does not exist to detect most bombs. Dogs will be ineffective as well. Gunpowder is not detected by the two most common commercialized explosive detection equipment (the old method - and the new method).

I also note that a bomb does not require any wires either. Some People use electrical systems because they are easy and cheap. Non-electric blasting caps are common stock and trade in the explosive industry - and are required to be used for any work that might be affected by a thunderstorm or electro-magnetic radiation. Given the prevalence of cell phones these days I'd only use electric blasting caps in very specific controlled conditions. Of course some people think I am too cautious. But I still have all my fingers. Retail cost wise when purchasing standard box quantities Non- electric blasting caps are several dollars each, and electric blasting caps are a bit less than a dollar (prices from about 2000). Of course, some people know how to build such things from scratch and in custom shapes and forms instead of the commercial blasting cap small diameter tube.

Bottom line; only bombs constructed by people unfamiliar with how explosive detection systems work might be detected by the current techniques. Bomb detection is really quite difficult.

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
3> I remember reading a while back about a new device that uses whats called T-Rays. Its the same as an xray, but doesn't have any adverse affects towards humans. If that technology works out it will be a huge leap ahead for security everywhere. Something along the lines of this technology is what will be needed to improve and streamline security, right now the policy is "assume everything metal is a weapon, and everything a liquid a bomb".

We are a long way from ever having a machine that would work as described and allow appropriate differentiations. As far as not have any adverse affects towards humans. I doubt that will ever be either (just the inconvenience of such screening is an adverse affect in my mind). The question is how much adverse affect, and is it reasonable for what you are doing.

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
4> Even with all that, I'm not really worried about something going on in the cabin. There's no terrorist who's going to commandeer a plane...read all the articles about crazy pax threatening to kill themselves and everyone else and they are always subdued. Put Sky Marshalls on the flight, give the FA's Tasers, more security on the plane will prevent hijacking.

I disagree with your assessment. I'm not concerned with "crazy passengers" - you are right in almost all cases they are subdued. My concern is with the rational person who has decided that they will die for their cause - and that it is OK that they kill other people in the process (in fact, the more people they kill the better for there cause). That person may well commandeer a plane - that person may well break into the cockpit - that is the person you wish security would stop (or that you wish that the government would recognize that a small knife in the hands of many people would allow that person to be stopped relatively fast - if you can't just shoot them).

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
5> Now about the cargo... how much is that screened? Here's an idea... anything powered by electricity will give off some sort of field, and produce some heat. If we could detect that, then we would have a way of either proves Joe Businessman left his laptop on, or if there is something else running that shouldn't be. Now obviously objects can be shielded, but this would show up on an X-Ray. Also, an infrared scan could show if a certain part of the bag was warmer than another, also leading to possible electronics. I'm not an ECE guy (ME/Aero) but I'm pretty sure that that technology is feasible.

Cargo, and baggage is a real concern. The likelyhood of being able to detect a bomb is about zero; and the technology is not feasible.

On some of the larger planes most luggage is now put into containers that should be able to contain the blast from a fairly small explosive device. That is certainly an effective way of dealing with the issue. The problem is that it would not be difficult to put a much larger bomb in luggage or a package than those containers could withstand. Real cargo would have no such issues. You could easily have hundreds of pounds of explosives in a cargo shipment.

Quoting WPIAeroGuy (Reply 34):
6> All that being said, the scariest place is subways. No security (other than being told you can't take pictures), closed spaces, and running underneath major cities' infrastructure. I think the government is really lucky that they can have a kneejerk reaction to every attack or threat and make it safe, pretty soon they're going to have to think outside the box.

You are in many ways right on this assessment. Subway attacks have also been done. However, the public emotional reaction is not quite what destroying a plane with passengers is. Terrorist are usually after an emotional response.

In the end; and something I have said in a post months ago, if the TSA - or anyone - was really serious about air travel security they would first secure the airport. The model is how US Nuclear Power Plants and Facilities are secured. The methods and systems are in place to allow thousands of people and tons of supplies to move in, and out, on a daily basis and be reasonably screened (and even take "visitors & contractors" in and out who have not been security screened). I am not sure that you would run all employees through the same security screening process as a nuclear worker which is much more in depth than even the airline pilots go through; but in my opinion general airport workers need better screening than what they are getting now.

I note also that Nuclear Plant security is run by private companies - that are inspected and tested by the NRC to ensure they are up to snuff (including mock attacks by a special test team made up largely from Special Forces personnel - with inside help from a key plant or security person). Failing such a test has significant consequences with significance cost to the plant for corrective actions and redoing the test - and fines if you really botched something.

Of course, instituting real airport grounds and general employee security would cost real money.... and would not be apparent to most passengers.

As far as passenger screening. Something along the line of pre 9/11 screening would be quite adequate. The real dangers are in people - not in the common objects they carry.

The most effective method to prevent hijackings is to keep people out of the cockpit; and then arm the flight crew so that if anyone does force the door (or blow the lock) that they most probably are met with a large slug on the way in (any reason that pilots could not have a sawed off 12 ga shotgun with slugs - which would stop most anyone even if they ave a bullet proof vest on - yes I know the slug will not penetrate the vest - but they should go down; fast).

Along with keeping people out of the cockpit the pilots must have the fortitude to keep flying to their destination - or even do an emergency landing somewhere regardless if the hijacker kills someone in the passenger compartment. I know that may sound cold to some - but the idea is to prevent mass murder or to minimize the damage and extent to at least that plane.

Of course, as stated before: Within the US (and most likely Canada as well).... The passengers are likely to take out any hijacker even at the cost of some of their lives. But, keep in mind that will not always occur. Mental domination and effective neutralization of the passengers can be done by the right terrorist.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:49 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 2):
But we know darn well what would happen if there were no security checks - there would be hijackings left, right, and center

And yet, bizarrely enough, not one single potential hijacker has been caught by airport security. Funny that. Seems that the whole liquids issue is going away in Europe - I took five flights last week, and not once did I have to take my ziploc bag out of my carry on. Feels like maybe sanity is returning.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:29 am

It seems to me that a lot of people are complaining that the security is a needless and inefective hassle. When I was a kid I remember waiting on the lawn at the airport for my dad to arrive and then greeting him at the edge of the tarmac as he got off a 747. I also remember that hijackings were a regular feature on the news.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19825
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:37 am

As usual I will trot out this article on how to actually design and implement effective security measures: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2459. While there is no such thing as perfect security, it is at least possible to make it much harder for terrorists. Today, security measures at most US airports are woefully inadequate.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:54 am

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 39):
It seems to me that a lot of people are complaining that the security is a needless and inefective hassle.

Yes, that's about the size of it. Catch them before they get to the airport.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
iflykpdx
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:42 am

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:00 am

I'm not sure if this idea is feasible or not, but why not have an ability to "lock down" a cockpit's systems so at least if the cockpit is compromised and the pilots are killed, the terrorists can't take control of the plane and do whatever they want to it. Maybe have a password that would have to be entered to get the systems out of "lock down" mode. Obviously this wouldn't help against a bomb, but it would to some extent foil a terrorist's plans.
Airport Management - UND
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:45 am

Quoting B707321C (Reply 36):
With this practice, the crew will not know if hand luggage belongs to continuing passengers or was left behind by a non-continuing passenger. I think the cabin should be empty of passengers and luggage between each leg. Just as an extra check.

What will this accomplish at WN (and every other airline for that matter)? Having all pax to offload and be rescreened again is pointless. Everything thats on that plane has already passed screening at the orgininating station so your point is moot. And a waste of time doing that.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:47 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 43):
Everything thats on that plane has already passed screening at the orgininating station so your point is moot. And a waste of time doing that.

And yet I believe it is (or used to be) a US requirement that all multi-leg flights to the US have full hand-luggage reconciliiation at intermediate stops (e.g. SA's flights stopping in SID or DKR) - at least it used to be, maybe they stopped that now.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
WPIAeroGuy
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:52 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:57 am

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 37):
Metal detectors can be set on how sensitive they are. The best ones can set the sensitivities to different levels for different zones (feet lower legs/ mid body / upper body / head).

After 9/11 many airports set their metal detectors really sensitive - which is why belt buckles used to set them off. In recent years they have backed off on that due to the number of "nuisance" alarms.

The real, and initial purpose, of the metal detector was to detect handguns - which have a pretty solid mass of metal (and key parts cannot yet be made from non-metalic parts).

I have no problem screening for handguns. But also believe that certain people should be allowed concealed carry (even on airplanes). What many people do not know is that at least prior to 9/11 that with the pilots concurrence certain people routinely carried on flights (typically police or federal officers). I do not know the current status of that program.

I understand what your saying, but you missed my point. The same amount of metal, both size and shape, in my belt buckle could easily be made into a weapon, not necessarily a gun, just some sort of sharp device.

Whether they are crazy passengers who want to open the door or trained terrorists, they aren't getting access to the cockpit. Short of a ridiculously elaborate plan with tons of inside help and massive involvment, I don't see another hijacking/plane-as-weapon scenario. Its much simpler to put a bomb in the hold then to comandeer the aircraft.

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 37):
The most effective method to prevent hijackings is to keep people out of the cockpit; and then arm the flight crew so that if anyone does force the door (or blow the lock) that they most probably are met with a large slug on the way in (any reason that pilots could not have a sawed off 12 ga shotgun with slugs - which would stop most anyone even if they ave a bullet proof vest on - yes I know the slug will not penetrate the vest - but they should go down; fast).

Guns on an airplane are a bad idea. Even the most trained police snipers are extremely careful when there are civilians around- are you going to let a FA or a pilot walk around with a sawed-off shotgun with hundreds of people in close proximity? A Taser is the quickest way to reder somebody immobile, and you shouldn't hafta worry about body armor. Even the lightest version (Type I I beleive, I may have it backwards) should be noticable if all heavy outer clothing are off.

-WPIAeroGuy
-WPIAeroGuy
 
B707321C
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:00 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 43):
What will this accomplish at WN (and every other airline for that matter)? Having all pax to offload and be rescreened again is pointless. Everything thats on that plane has already passed screening at the orgininating station so your point is moot. And a waste of time doing that.

I agree it take extra time, but it increases security, but I did not say rescreening, only re boarding. Otherwise, how will you know that nothing it left behind e.g explosives, weapons? I know these items should not get through security in the first place, but extra security will not harm. I guess it comes down to how much you trust the intial TSA screening process.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:02 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 44):
And yet I believe it is (or used to be) a US requirement that all multi-leg flights to the US have full hand-luggage reconciliiation at intermediate stops (e.g. SA's flights stopping in SID or DKR) - at least it used to be, maybe they stopped that now.

I have been on countless flights with a 1 stop before my final destination and I have NEVER seen anybody being asked to get off and be re-screened again and re-board, including myself.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:04 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 47):
I have been on countless flights with a 1 stop before my final destination and I have NEVER seen anybody being asked to get off and be re-screened again and re-board, including myself.

Were these domestic or international flights ? Possibly the rule is waived for domestic flights.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
B707321C
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: "Everything We Know About Security Is Wrong"

Mon Aug 27, 2007 5:09 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 48):
Were these domestic or international flights ? Possibly the rule is waived for domestic flights.

Domestic US

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 47):
I have been on countless flights with a 1 stop before my final destination and I have NEVER seen anybody being asked to get off and be re-screened again and re-board, including myself.



Again not re-screened. only re-board. My point, I have never seen this pratice anywhere, but in US. I believe every leg in Europe has a unique flight number, no flights with stops anymore.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos