Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

N1120A · Thu May 12, 2016 10:02 pm

If you want to speed up screening, and are hell bent on keeping the ridiculous TSA around, just dump the naked machines and make PreCheck the standard for regular passengers, with the new PreCheck being even less invasive.

Quoting coairman (Reply 99):
- The FAA imposes a federal carry on bag size restriction that applies to ALL airlines.

That is not the FAA's place to impose.

Quoting coairman (Reply 99):
-The TSA will enforce the FAA carry on bag size restriction at the check point by utilizing a bag size template at the front of the X-ray machine that restricts bags out of compliance.

The TSA isn't there to enforce airline sizing. In fact, there was a lawsuit over putting sizers on airport security belts.

Quoting tlecam (Reply 87):
Where did you get a police search out of my post?

Because you specifically said you wanted POLICE to do the search. If that ever happened, I would file suit and so would a lot of other people.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 86):
True enough. But even if they had, the staff, equipment, training, and procedures in place back then would not have prevented it had they been.

That makes no grammatical sense.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 86):
We are not using scientific analysis here, just gut guesstimations. None of statistics we've been throwing around here are usful enough to draw a conclusion either way.

The "red team" statistics are extremely stark.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 86):
The quality level of TSA staff today is still light years ahead of who the airlines employed before 9/11.

No, they are the same people.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 86):
Like I said, I travel 16-18 times per year, I get it.

I fly over 250,000 miles a year. I get it. The TSA is not at all better than what we had before. The rules are just different. Not to mention the heightened awareness of passengers and willingness to engage physically.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 85):
I'll readily agree that there are problems with the approach, but there's no legal reason that police cannot perform administrative searches without a warrant in one role and more invasive searches with a warrant (or other legitimate reason) in another.

Except that their duties require them to look for contraband other than WEI. Not to mention giving them discretion to search in the way the TSA has would lead them to doing drug and other contraband searches that they aren't supposed to be performing.

Quoting copter808 (Reply 84):
Why should search legality be different just because they are sworn officers? TSA folks are government employees acting on behalf of the Government. Both searches should be the same.

The difference is that police are required to look for contraband other than WEI. The TSA is legally required to NOT look for such things, though they can report it if they see it. The other difference is giving screeners powers of arrest is a very dangerous, slippery slope.

[Edited 2016-05-12 15:06:06]

coairman · Thu May 12, 2016 10:32 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):

Quoting coairman (Reply 99):
- The FAA imposes a federal carry on bag size restriction that applies to ALL airlines.

That is not the FAA's place to impose

I respectfully disagree. Either the FAA or the DOT has jurisdiction and the legal right to impose a federal carry on bag size requirement.

Per wikipedia-

"The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the national aviation authority of the United States, with powers to regulate all aspects of American civil aviation."

Cubsrule · Thu May 12, 2016 11:12 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):
The difference is that police are required to look for contraband other than WEI. The TSA is legally required to NOT look for such things, though they can report it if they see it.

Are you sure TSA isn't required to report?

AAIL86 · Thu May 12, 2016 11:39 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):
Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 86):
The quality level of TSA staff today is still light years ahead of who the airlines employed before 9/11.

No, they are the same people.

They are absolutely not the same people, I worked with both firsthand and know from personal experience.
The previous contract staff went to get retail jobs when the private screening work dried up, while the TSA recruited ex-military as much as they could. My personal guess is that less then 10% of current TSA staff worked for contract security before 9/11 (Note - I couldn't find a number listed to quote - thats my own gut check guess. Feel free to correct with a source).

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):
I fly over 250,000 miles a year. I get it. The TSA is not at all better than what we had before. The rules are just different. Not to mention the heightened awareness of passengers and willingness to engage physically.

Then you and I will just have to disagree on this. As I have said, the TSA has a lot of work to do and needs some reforms. But much has changed for the better. For example - before 9/11, less then 1% of checked luggage went through explosive screening, today its 100 percent. Don't take this the wrong way - but your romanticized opinion of what the airport experience was like under private security in the past isn't in line with reality.

But while we're on the topic, since you've obviously got this figured out, what happens if you get your way and the TSA gets dismantled? Enlighten us on how a better system can be achieved, I'd love to hear it.

Quoting coairman (Reply 101):
I respectfully disagree. Either the FAA or the DOT has jurisdiction and the legal right to impose a federal carry on bag size requirement.

100% correct. The FAA and DOT are the regulatory bodies responsible for the regulation of all aspects of civil aviation in the US. Not controversial.

mayor · Fri May 13, 2016 12:12 am

Quoting ckfred (Reply 96):

But with checked bags, you know how many bags are in the hold, and you probably and a good idea how much weight is in the hold, as well as having it loaded to have correct balance.

Whether manual or computerized weight and balance, it's still figured based on average bag weight unless it's a special deal like a military move, etc. as I mentioned. As far as the carry ons, they are figured in the weight of the pax as an average weight, depending on whether it's summer or winter.

copter808 · Fri May 13, 2016 12:41 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):
Because you specifically said you wanted POLICE to do the search. If that ever happened, I would file suit and so would a lot of other people.

What would be the grounds for your suit?

Quoting N1120A (Reply 100):
The difference is that police are required to look for contraband other than WEI. The TSA is legally required to NOT look for such things, though they can report it if they see it. The other difference is giving screeners powers of arrest is a very dangerous, slippery slope.

The police are not REQUIRED to look for contraband without a valid reason. I fail to see what the difference would between the searchers, other than who is performing it. A civilian, acting as an agent for the police, has the same limitations as the police officer.

The only difference I can see between the screeners having arrest powers and the current system is that the system in place now gives an extra level of review. The police officer can evaluate the TSA agent's complaint for correct procedure and cause. If probable cause exists, the offender may well be arrested. As it is now, if I were to carry a weapon through the screening, I would likely be stopped and arrested. The only difference between the two systems is WHO makes the arrest.

MOBflyer · Fri May 13, 2016 3:01 am

Quoting copter808 (Reply 105):
What would be the grounds for your suit?

Unreasonable search and seizure. A police officer off-duty does not have to act on probable cause (seeing something in an x-ray) but a police officer on duty certainly must act on probable cause.

stlgph · Fri May 13, 2016 3:09 am

tonight, at midway airport

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=byUVR04CMBU

copter808 · Fri May 13, 2016 4:29 am

Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 106):
Unreasonable search and seizure. A police officer off-duty does not have to act on probable cause (seeing something in an x-ray) but a police officer on duty certainly must act on probable cause.

What kind of "search" are we talking about here? Why is it "unreasonable" if done by a police officer, but not if done by a TSA officer? A police officer does not need to make an arrest or issue a citation for every offense he/she sees. they are still allowed to use discretion.

You don't have to consent to the search. You go through security at your own option. (Because you want to fly)

flyguy89 · Fri May 13, 2016 5:26 am

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 103):

Then you and I will just have to disagree on this. As I have said, the TSA has a lot of work to do and needs some reforms. But much has changed for the better.

I'm still not understanding how this jives with a 95% failure rate. Perhaps private security had a 97% failure rate...even then the government has now spent an absurd amount of money and resources to move the dial just two notches and really make air travel no safer statistically.

I'll admit I was young when experiencing pre-9/11 security, but I've racked up over 200,000 miles in the last two years, so have plenty of experience with the TSA...it's pretty bad. They may have gotten a better coat of paint with the officious uniforms and government benefits, but a 95% failure rate is stunning and goes along with mine and many others' experience with them. Perhaps the post-9/11 solution shouldn't have been creating another inefficient (and clearly ineffective) government bureaucracy, but instead cracking down and better regulating the security contractors?

I really don't see the harm in abolishing the TSA and reverting to private security and just letting the Department of Homeland Security (the department the TSA currently falls under) regulate the private security contractors-- essentially what happens now in the airports that use private security instead of TSA. At worst we'd be no less safe (95% failure isn't hard to beat) but tax payers wouldn't be on the hook. At best we get better, more efficient security at no cost to the tax payer.

OB1504 · Fri May 13, 2016 6:38 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 109):
I'm still not understanding how this jives with a 95% failure rate. Perhaps private security had a 97% failure rate...even then the government has now spent an absurd amount of money and resources to move the dial just two notches and really make air travel no safer statistically.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt31cqGe9fM

This isn't too far off from what it was really like in the pre-TSA days.

william · Fri May 13, 2016 1:13 pm

Quoting stlgph (Reply 107):
tonight, at midway airporthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=byUVR04CMBU

What exactly is causing the long lines this year across the nation?..........Take this from a frequent flyer, get the TSA app.

drgmobile · Fri May 13, 2016 1:44 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Thread starter):
Hmmm, last time I was at Love Field, where Southwest " Bags Fly Free" Airlines
operates 18 of 20 gates, the TSA lines were still ridiculous

This isn't a valid way to determine anything, because you have no idea how these lines are resourced and staffed relative to other lines. If the Southwest lines flow more quickly and so TSA cuts staff at them, of course the lines are going to be just as bad!

My understanding is that data from checkpoints served by Southwest exclusively versus those with carriers with bag fees shows that there is a 20%+ impact on the number of carry-on bags through screening. Data -- not anecdote.

The article below references this. I have heard the 20% figure separately also.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/11/pf/c...cked-baggage-fee-airport-security/

alasizon · Fri May 13, 2016 4:14 pm

Quoting drgmobile (Reply 112):
My understanding is that data from checkpoints served by Southwest exclusively versus those with carriers with bag fees shows that there is a 20%+ impact on the number of carry-on bags through screening. Data -- not anecdote.

I don't doubt the 20% figure but in my opinion, it is not the carry-ons that are the bulk of the delay. It is the people. Even in Pre, I see people all the time look so confused as to why they have to take off their 20 silver bracelets before going through a metal detector.

Common sense in security (both on the passenger side and on the TSA side) has completely gone out the window and I can't see it improving.

As an employee, I used to some days use the security checkpoint to go through when I wasn't bringing any food with me. That ended as soon as the lines would take me almost ten minutes from ID check to the actual metal detector and once they decided I no longer was able to bring rice and beans through because "the beans may contain liquified explosives". So now every day I make the trek through the secured doors.

mayor · Fri May 13, 2016 4:34 pm

Quoting Alasizon (Reply 113):
once they decided I no longer was able to bring rice and beans through because "the beans may contain liquified explosives". So now every day I make the trek through the secured doors.

Well, in their own way, the beans CAN be sort of explosive.

chrisair · Fri May 13, 2016 4:40 pm

Quoting william (Reply 111):
Take this from a frequent flyer, get the TSA app.

I'm a very frequent flier...what will having the TSA app do for me?

copter808 · Fri May 13, 2016 5:18 pm

Quoting Alasizon (Reply 113):
As an employee, I used to some days use the security checkpoint to go through when I wasn't bringing any food with me. That ended as soon as the lines would take me almost ten minutes from ID check to the actual metal detector and once they decided I no longer was able to bring rice and beans through because "the beans may contain liquified explosives". So now every day I make the trek through the secured doors.

And this is part of what makes it crazy... The beans made it through anyway, so why not be a bit more lenient for employees. Same with liquids. A 500ml bottle is a no no. But 5 100ml bottles is ok!

par13del · Fri May 13, 2016 6:02 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 109):
I'm still not understanding how this jives with a 95% failure rate. Perhaps private security had a 97% failure rate...even then the government has now spent an absurd amount of money and resources to move the dial just two notches and really make air travel no safer statistically.

If you tell the average man in the street that the government spent billions setting up a new entity with a major focus on air travel they will tell you that for the money spent, it must be better than what was there before, perception and reality.
In some circles, the major point is to make people feel safe to continue to travel and not push them to do things that they do not want to do that would actually increase safety.

william · Fri May 13, 2016 6:50 pm

Quoting chrisair (Reply 115):
I'm a very frequent flier...what will having the TSA app do for me?

Gives you wait times at the different airports and its handy in describing what is or isn't allowed for carry on.

ordbosewr · Fri May 13, 2016 6:57 pm

Quoting drgmobile (Reply 112):
My understanding is that data from checkpoints served by Southwest exclusively versus those with carriers with bag fees shows that there is a 20%+ impact on the number of carry-on bags through screening. Data -- not anecdote.

CNN just had Mary Schiavo on as the expert on this topic and she reiterated this 20% number.

The problem I have is that even if you took away the 20% will that result in a 20% improvement in wait-times, I am not sure you can do that.
I just saw an article about the meltdown in security at MDW, an airport that has SW as the major carrier, I really don't think you can say the 20% applies there. If we all want to have shorter lines then the TSA needs to find a way to implement the mandate they have and get passengers through much quicker no matter what they have with them. The current model/approach they have is failing in all respects.
The addtion of even 20% more bags does not change the fact that the lines are long and slow.

airbazar · Fri May 13, 2016 7:14 pm

Quoting dennypayne (Reply 57):
Disagree - more of the once/twice a year flyers signing up will just slow things down even more. Right now things are much slower in pre-check than they used to be because there are more "amateurs" that get directed there from the regular lines and they still try to take off their shoes, pull everything out of their bags, etc.

You missed my original comment which was, make most checkpoints be pre-check checkpoint. In other words, increase the throughput of pre-check checkpoints significantly.

Quoting tlecam (Reply 79):

The process isn't really slowed by the bags directly. The process is slowed by people who don't empty their pockets for the body scanners or try to go through metal detectors wearing a full metal jacket.

It's not slowed by that either. Any screening plan needs to account for that.
The process is slow because only 1 passenger at a time can walk thru a screening machine and it takes a good 30 seconds per passenger. It's a "throughput" issue not a TSA or passenger education issue. The only way to speed things up is by adding significantly more machines/checkpoints, or pre-check everyone so we don't have to be as strict at the checkpoint.

antoniemey · Fri May 13, 2016 11:36 pm

Quoting Yflyer (Reply 17):
I also wonder if people are overestimating the effect of bag fees on people bring carry ons.

I think they are. Where bags create an issue is where you have people that want to take 3 suitcases, 4 carryons, and their kitchen sink on their week long vacation to Hawaii. Yes, there are people that will carry on to avoid the bag fee... on the other hand, there are far more people that will carry on to avoid the possibility of delay at the other end. So, yes, bag fees change the numbers, but not to a huge degree.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
The security checkpoint is by design a bottleneck and no airport terminal has been built in this country with enough security checkpoints to account for peak time volumes.

BNA has plenty of lanes. They do not have plenty of TSA personnel to open them.

Quoting dabpit (Reply 23):
TSA checkpoints are like Walmart checkouts, there are plenty of lanes to use but only a few are ever open

Quoting N1120A (Reply 33):
You must not remember the old days, when a whole family could go through the checkpoint to see their relative off or av geeks could just spend the day in the terminal. There were at least as many people going through then, and less delays.

There were also fewer hoops to jump through. Whether that's bad or good depends on which statistics you look at.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 35):
The only solution is a return to sanity, whereby people check their bags in and bring with them in the cabin only their essentials in a smaller bag, one that can fit under the chair in front of you if needs be.

That would require convincing a lot of people that they don't need their kitchen sink with them at all times.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 36):
I don't defend TSA much but unless the airport physically closes from 7am to noon, they are required to be there.

I think it's more accurate to say that they are required to be present whenever the concourse is open, as I'm pretty sure there's no team of screeners present between when the checkpoint closes as around 10pm and when it opens back up again at 3:30am. The airport is open, the concourses are not.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 42):
I've never seen a un-staffed checkpoint during peak times, ever.

You haven't been to Nashville in the last 6 months, apparently.

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 103):
For example - before 9/11, less then 1% of checked luggage went through explosive screening, today its 100 percent.

That's where I think great improvement actually has been made. Every bag is checked some way or another, rather than requiring airline employees to ask a couple of questions that could easily be misunderstood or, gasp, answered with a lie.

ikramerica · Sat May 14, 2016 12:47 am

Fair enough. Airside is all the TSA is concerned with. Airport police deal with pre clearance areas. If airside is open, TSA has to be there.

mayor · Sat May 14, 2016 3:58 am

Quoting antoniemey (Reply 121):
I think they are. Where bags create an issue is where you have people that want to take 3 suitcases, 4 carryons, and their kitchen sink on their week long vacation to Hawaii. Yes, there are people that will carry on to avoid the bag fee... on the other hand, there are far more people that will carry on to avoid the possibility of delay at the other end. So, yes, bag fees change the numbers, but not to a huge degree.

This has been a problem, even before 9/11. People were bringing everything on board either because they didn't want to wait at the carousel OR (and this is the airlines' fault) they were afraid to check their bags because of a poor job of connecting them. The airlines can only blame themselves for this and because of it, pax are still worried that their bags won't make it, even IF the airlines are doing a much better job of making sure the bags get to where they're supposed to be.

jimbobjoe · Sat May 14, 2016 9:08 am

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
Make TSA PreCheck cheap enough so that most people will sign up for it, and allocate most checkpoints to passengers with TSA PreCheck.

I'd argue that defeats the purpose. If *everyone* is in PreCheck then, effectively, no one is in PreCheck.

The other terminating problem for PreCheck, which becomes more likely the more people who are in it and the more time which passes, is a security event involving a PreCheck passenger. Once that happens, and the idea that the background check has no relationship to whether the PreCheck passenger is a security risk or not, the program effectively terminates and TSA has to put PreCheck passengers through the same ordeal as everyone else.

PlanesNTrains · Sat May 14, 2016 4:30 pm

Quoting jimbobjoe (Reply 124):
I'd argue that defeats the purpose. If *everyone* is in PreCheck then, effectively, no one is in PreCheck.

I suppose if it increases the throughput at the screening point, it helps everyone, but I agree that they still need everything to go through the scanner and I believe everyone still needs to go through the screening machine.

-Dave

ckfred · Sat May 14, 2016 9:02 pm

I seem to remember the "real" reason and the "stated" reason why airlines started to impose checked bag fees. The real reason was that fuel was climbing north of $100 a barrel, while the economy was in a recession. Rather than raise fares, the checked bag fee was added as a way to get additional revenue.

I seem to recall one airline saying that checked bags were becoming heavier and heavier, leading to more workmen's comp claims by ground crew. This was why the threshold for oversized baggage was reduced from 70 pounds to 50 pounds. I seem to recall reading somewhere that with bags shifting from the traditional suitcase to the spinning rollerboard with several zippers, there were more claims for damaged bags (brokern casters, pull handles, and zippers).

antoniemey · Sun May 15, 2016 4:27 am

Quoting ckfred (Reply 126):
he "real" reason and the "stated" reason

Even the "real" reason doesn't reflect current reality. What will happen if airlines drop bag fees? The discount fare buckets will go up $60.

Why?

Because the airline will lose the ability to only charge those who check a bag for the additional cost baggage incurs and will thus have to assume every passenger is going to have baggage.

And if you look at the 6-9 month advance prices, you'll notice a funny pattern. The airline that brags about not charging bag fees costs $60 more than the airlines that do on any given routing. (Note, that I'm not saying anything bad about that, as they are telling the truth, they don't charge a fee per bag.)

TC957 · Sun May 15, 2016 7:25 am

I have flown often domestically in Japan. Never experienced security delays of more than a couple of minutes. Bags get checked in for free, even stuff like shopping bags and small items.
Flyers know nothing will get nicked and it'll be quickly and safely delivered on arrival.
As with most transportation matters, the Japanese have it spot-on.

william · Mon May 16, 2016 4:16 pm

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/05/...e-at-airport-security-checkpoints/

Most of the horrid long line pics have been of Midway, now ORD is having TSA problems too........This is just an ineptitude on a level of the DMV.

Cubsrule · Mon May 16, 2016 4:31 pm

Quoting antoniemey (Reply 127):
The airline that brags about not charging bag fees costs $60 more than the airlines that do on any given routing. (Note, that I'm not saying anything bad about that, as they are telling the truth, they don't charge a fee per bag.)

Do you have some evidence that this is universally true? Certainly, on the routes I fly a lot (BNA-CHI is one that springs to mind), that is not the case. For instance, for travel between October 24 and October 27, WN's lowest BNA-CHI fare is $192, UA's is $233 and AA's is $314.

OB1504 · Tue May 17, 2016 9:01 pm

Quoting william (Reply 118):
Gives you wait times at the different airports and its handy in describing what is or isn't allowed for carry on.

Wait times are infinite and what is allowed through security depends on the mood of the screener.

There, saved you a download.

Quoting william (Reply 129):
Most of the horrid long line pics have been of Midway, now ORD is having TSA problems too........This is just an ineptitude on a level of the DMV.

It's nationwide.

MDW, where "bags fly free" WN is the dominant carrier, suffering from 2-hour waits is proof that the initiative proposed by the senators will do little to nothing to reduce wait times.

william · Wed May 18, 2016 1:24 pm

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 131):
Wait times are infinite and what is allowed through security depends on the mood of the screener.

There, saved you a download.

Think of the entertainment one would be missing standing in line at ORD for three hours while looking at the TSA app state the wait is only thirty minutes...................

Sooner787 · Wed May 18, 2016 9:10 pm

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 131):
It's nationwide.

MDW, where "bags fly free" WN is the dominant carrier, suffering from 2-hour waits is proof that the initiative proposed by the senators will do little to nothing to reduce wait times.

Nothing will change until some MAJOR airports like ATL, ORD, DFW ...etc....tell the TSA
to pound sand and privatize their security screening.

lewis · Wed May 18, 2016 9:31 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
Make life miserable for those who don't want to signup for TSA PreCheck.

So a person like me, who is not a citizen or a permanent resident (and not eligible for Pre Check) but works in the US and travels domestic every week for work, needs to have his life made even more miserable because a [email protected] like you thinks so. How nice.

Vctony · Wed May 18, 2016 9:37 pm

Privatizing screening will not accomplish anything as the TSA is still in control of the operations of the private contractor. The private companies are subcontractors of the TSA and not the airport and report to the TSA and not the airport.

32andBelow · Thu May 19, 2016 1:45 am

Quoting Vctony (Reply 135):
Privatizing screening will not accomplish anything as the TSA is still in control of the operations of the private contractor. The private companies are subcontractors of the TSA and not the airport and report to the TSA and not the airport.

Well If it's a staffing issue then it should help...I don't think the TSA will have 1000 people doing nothing. BUt I could bt wrong.

Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

RE: Senators: Drop Bag Fees To Shorten TSA Lines

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net