TSA Goes Into Overdrive: Severe Restrictions on US Flights

Back to Forum
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 29 total)

  • Anonymous
    Guest

    VintageKrug
    Participant

    TSA bureaucrats have now found the perfect excuse to ramp up their control over the public, imposing useless window dressing measures to placate a hysterical public which will do little to address the terrorist threat and much to put the travelling public off flying and deliver exactly the solution the terrorists seek.

    Only Air Canada has gone public as yet, but expect other US bound carriers to follow these “recommendations”:

    – Additional hands on security screening at the gate

    – PAX must remain seated for the last hour of the flight

    – No access to carry on luggage for the last hour of flight

    – No personal effects in the posession for the last hour of flight including bags or airline pillows blankets etc.

    I also understand there are proposing restrictions on use of in-flight internet and *even* the removal of Moving Maps on IFE to thwart those waiting until they are over US territory. Errrr, will looking out the window be banned next? Daft.

    We need to keep flying, and flying securely involves increasing investment into Intelligence and Profiling, not this McArthy-ist bureaucracy which frustrates everyone’s travel plans and delivers exactly the result the terrorists seek.


    JackyLek
    Participant

    HI VK

    I think the next step will be that all pax to US – is flying like Guantamo Bay prisoner, No window on A/C, pax blindfolded and if these security doesnt work, all pax will be lock on their seat : ) ……
    I think these new rules or investment in new security is useless, unless they invest more in identify the pax before let them to check-in. Just see how EL-AL screening their pax out when they check-in. I rather get the though screening at check-in then wait until the boarding process at the gate.


    VintageKrug
    Participant

    While the Guantanamo reference is somewhat tasteless, even when meant in jest, I think you are spot on about the need for more intelligent profiling.


    SimonRowberry
    Participant

    Hi VK

    I totally agree with you. I’ve seen the Air Canada rules as well.

    They seem to miss the point by a mile – this already smells of an enormous security cock-up somewhere and we, as usual, will have to suffer from ill-thought out knee-jerk “solutions” to the issue.

    I suppose any potential bomber will now consider detonating any device earlier than one hour before landing, as in the case of Lockerbie, the Air India attack in 1985 and numerous others. Perhaps I’m being over-simplistic, but I simply can’t see how making anyone sit down for the last hour of the flight and not have access to their hand baggage (which may be stowed under seat!) will contribute one iota to increased flight safety.

    Will they also be limited to US-bound flights only? I understand that in this case the suspected potential bomber originated in Lagos. Are we to assume that such attacks are the sole preserve of flights going to the US? I seem to recall that the thwarted 2006 “liquid bomb” attacks also had Canadian-bound aircraft as potential targets.


    JonathanCohen09
    Participant

    Hello Everyone,

    I hope that you are all enjoying the festive season so far.

    This is a very interesting thread as it is likely to be a problem that we face for the forseable future.

    I have to say that I agree with what has been said so far. If we accept the premise that the best way to prevent these attacks is to stop the perpetrators getting onto the aircraft in the first place then unfortunately we also, in my opinion, need to accept that passenger profiling is the best way to achieve this.

    I am for that reason a very big fan of El Al’s security as profiling is one of the key elements in the process. I am 99% certain that had the passenger on the Delta flight been travelling with EL Al he would either not have been allowed to check-in for the flight as the security interview would have caught him out or the body search that his profile would undoubtedly have meant he was subjected to, would have found the explosive materials that he had on his person.

    I know that people have a problem with this type of profiling but it is hard to argue against it’s effectiveness when it is properly used. Perhaps more of the worlds airlines should adopt EL Al style security checks as then the terrorists would think twice about trying to get explosives onto planes.

    I am reminded of the incident many years ago when a terrorist used his pregnant girlfriend, who was also travelling with her other child, to try and get a bomb onboard an EL Al flight from Heathrow as he thought a pregnant woman would not be seen as a risk. It was only the vigilance and experience of the EL Al security officer that found the bomb in her carry on bag. He found it because in the course of his hand search of the bag he thought it was too heavy for it’s size. the semtex had been placed between the lining and the outside wall of the bag.

    I am very interested to know how other poster’s would feel about being more rigorously profiled before they check-in?

    Happy new year to you all and I look forward to more interesting debates in 2010.

    Regards,

    Jonathan


    SimonRowberry
    Participant

    Hi Jonathan

    Season’s Greeting to you too.

    I feel the same about profiling as I do about the ID cards issue – if one has nothing to hide and it will make life easier for more people, then fine. As long as it is actually effective.

    Simon


    Hess963
    Participant

    Hi everyone !!

    I agree what Jonathan and Simon have said. Especially what Simon has stressed about, if nobody has nothing to hide, than it should be that an issue for anyone, especially if it helps everybody to travel safer.

    But the damage has already been done–this Nigerian person has made 10/11 a very present issue again. I am really sorry for those who are travelling to North American destinations at the moment–with all these strict and intensive checks. It is right to be curious and act preventively in a positive way for the sake of all and its safety. I just personally hate it and it angers me that there are still persons in the world who can’t just stop harming or attacking US aircrafts or US citizens with purpose–for what ? Justifying deaths of innocent people whatever citizenship or religion they have. It is just appalling–I think we would never understand those people and their thinking. I just thank God–that the attempt was not successful and nobody was harmed.

    I personally do not like all these checks and questionings etc. But if it really help all pax to fly safer –than I think –safety is not a question of money or time. It is in such circumstances a very important annoyance. I still remeber the time where we do not have such intensive checks. Well, actually in some airports I have flown recently–the security checks are comparing to US ones are almost non-existent. I think it will be really hard for everyone to know which one is the right security checks or the balance between righteous and unfair.

    I just hope to travel to the US one day where such circumstances are obsolete and everyone feels secure and safe without these restrictions to one’s individual.


    NTarrant
    Participant

    Hi Jonathan and Simon

    Compliments of the season.

    I agree about profiling, why not, some may think it could be racist, I say too bad as unfortunate as it may be. It would not worry me having enhanced security if it was not a knee jerk reaction. All too often its a case of “bolting the door after the horse has bolted”.

    What would speed up the process is if a floor walker told people to start taking jackets off, getting lap tops out etc etc rather than expecting people to read notices, you guys probably do like me. Then they could enhance the security without slowing down the process, of course they will have to employ more staff!

    All the best for the new year

    Nigel


    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    Hello Jonathan

    El Al’s security is probably the best there is and it seems there are passengers flying to Israel who choose this airline for this reason.

    But would travellers flying on other routes using different carriers be prepared to abide by El Al’s security procedures which demand that passengers arrive at the airport well before departure ?

    Right now, an El Al business class passenger flying LHR-TLV must check-in at least 135 mins ahead. Only if he or she has hand luggage can the check-in time be cut to at least 95 mins:

    http://www.businesstraveller.com/archive/2009/november-2009/special-reports/route-of-the-month


    Charles-P
    Participant

    I don’t object to security but I do object to meaningless, “look we’re doing something” window dressing that most airport checks have become. I imagine this has more to do in the event of legal action, “see here how much security we had, you can’t sue us” than real detection.

    As previous poster have said, adopt the EL AL approach and use profiling.


    JonathanCohen09
    Participant

    Hello Everyone,

    LondonCity, you make a good point ! Business people clearly want to minimise the time they spend with airport formalities which is completely undestandable. I am no different in that regard. the question I would ask is do those same business people want to arrive safely at their chosen destination, wherever it might be? Clearly it is a retorical question, however the point I am trying to make is a serious one.

    Ben Gurion Airport is in my opinion one of the safest, if not the safest in the world. this is for two main reasons. First their security processes and procedures are second to none! Second is the attitude of the Israelis, if not all foreigners as well, that the security is a necessary part of their journey and so they allow for it as part of their travelling day. I recently oveheard a man berating an Israeli security officer at Ben Gurion for the amount of time it was taking to get through the process. the security officer in the face of what was quite an aggressive onslaught simply told the gentleman that it was not for his benefit as he was not flying but the passenger was. this response silenced the man very quickly.

    I am sorry for the long reply, but if we all just accepted that the security measures are there for our benefit ultimately, and not to cause us hassle and delay then things would go a lot more smoothly. Generally even with the extra security screening, i can get through Ben Gurion at it’s busiest times quicket than I can most UK airports. I know LHR is much bigger and bussier but would not take so long if they would only put on as many security personel as needed to keep all the lines open as they do at Ben Gurion.

    I for one will put up with whatever sensible measures are necessary to ensure my safety when flying. they do not however include being stuck in my seat for the last hour of the flight.

    Let’s hear some more opinions on this please.

    Safe travels,

    Jonathan


    JackyLek
    Participant

    HI

    As the airline industry EL AL have what they call a lock-down security. Yes it comes with a lot of quetions and make the check in time longer then other airlines, and some questions may be very personal or just nonsens. But after the first round you may be on a second round and your answers should be compare with the first one, or else you may be out from the plane. Business Traveller was meant to make it fast and easy, but Im afraid thoose days are over. For me Im rather to come to the Airport early and do all the extra checks, and know that my trip would be safer. Of course nobody can give a 100% garanti, but at least 90% is better then 80%.


    SimonRowberry
    Participant

    Hi All,

    A pressing question – I’m flying out of LHR tomorrow (T3) – AY to Helsinki in Economy (I’ll only upset some of our fellow posters if I take my child in Business Class!).

    Should I be allowing substantially more time than usual?

    Also, are we likely to be limited to 1 cabin bag each?

    I’d welcome any advice,

    Simon


    JonathanCohen09
    Participant

    Hello Simon,

    compliments of the season to you and your family. In theory the restriction is only for people flying to the USA but since security at LHR does not allow them to distinguish between those flying to the US and to other destinations you should only take one piece of HB just in case and definitely allow extra time.

    Better to do both rather than have to check-in an extra bag or miss your flight.

    Have a great trip and looking forwardto seeing you on the 14th.

    All the best for 2010 as well,

    Safe travels,

    Jonathan

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 29 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller March 2024 edition
Business Traveller March 2024 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls