Airport Security

tracker-man

and what then do you suggest? I don't think its fair to criticize the way things are done now, without having a better alternative yourself...

Mint Sauce

tracker-man wrote: »

Anyone with some common sense should be fully ready for the security checks to get in and out as quickly as possible.

yes and no, i fly through UK and ireland airports atleast 2 to 3 times a year, dublin/knock/belfast and heathrow/gatwick, so i have an idea to expect queues, or i know how far the desk is where they check your boarding pass to the x ray machines, and use this time to removes shoes belts etc, transfer keys, wallet, change, MP3 to bag/jacket etc, so i'm ready to pass through quickly

however, used a regional airport last year, never used it before, due to transport to airport, checked in just before desk closed, and just got caught unprepared, only thing seperating check in and security was a deviding wall, infact, it was only a few steps, there was no boarding pass check desk before the security point, the guy who patoraled the arch, also checked your pass, so i wasn't quite ready, quicky removing jacket and laptop, and acidently went though the arch, still with wallet and keys in pocket and of course had to go though again

was the only time i can rememeber doing this, and will know for next time and be better prepared when i use that airport or similar

sebastianlieken

100ml of liquids.....remember to pee before customs so! lol

ah no, funny thing is im workin at lufthansa in germany atm, n i have to go thru metal detector evry morning....the amount of crap ya can get thru with, its mad! im jus seein what i can get thru with for the craic. i can get thru with stanly knives no bother! lol

robinph

tracker-man wrote: »

and what then do you suggest? I don't think its fair to criticize the way things are done now, without having a better alternative yourself...

Get rid of liquid ban and get rid of restrictions on size of hand luggage for starters. The amount of carry on I have is between me and the airline carrying me, it is not a security issue in the slightest. There is no need for the bans on things like nail clippers and razors either.

bonjo1983

Bond-007 wrote: »

Has anyone here ever flown from Waterford airport? The security between the public and airside areas is ok except for the shop that has an opening onto both public and airside areas.

That has ended at waterford airport and the ship is located at departures side, due to the security risk.

The liquids and gels is a bit of a waste of time. Alot of the security is all americanised and thats the big problem i feel.

Davidth88

One of the posters has raised a totally valid point , if you have a pallet load of 1 litre water bottle , is the technology good enough to tell any scanner operator that the middle bottles have not been tampered with ?

If these security checks are needed on flights , why not on ships? I recently took the HSS to Holyhead and back , no checks at all ( not even an ID check ).

Now I find these checks annoying but necessary part of travelling , but I would love someone to show me where attacks have actually been foiled , where a potential terrorist has been stopped with a bomb, or whatever hidden in their belt.

As for being prepared , I travel a lot , but even I am sometimes caught out , for example in Luton last month I was pulled up because the jacket I put through the scanner had too much change in the pockets ! ( I had flown about 6 times in 2 weeks and each time stuck my change in my jacket )

FlutterinBantam

sebastianlieken wrote: »

100ml of liquids.....remember to pee before customs so! lol

ah no, funny thing is im workin at lufthansa in germany atm, n i have to go thru metal detector evry morning....the amount of crap ya can get thru with, its mad! im jus seein what i can get thru with for the craic. i can get thru with stanly knives no bother! lol

I wouldn't find that funny at all, even if written properly.

Davidth88

I wouldn't find that funny at all, even if written properly.

It may not be funny as in ha ha , but if true it certainly shows the security up for what it is , a big ' show ' to try to make us secure .

My challenge is still there , show me a newspaper article where a would be terrorist has been stopped in security and charged ( and I don't mean a poor old granny with a pair of nail clippers ).... then my scepticism will take a night off .

random_banter

Davidth88 wrote: »

My challenge is still there , show me a newspaper article where a would be terrorist has been stopped in security and charged ( and I don't mean a poor old granny with a pair of nail clippers ).... then my scepticism will take a night off .

Richard Reid- the shoe bomber... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(terrorist) - part of the reason, I would presume, that we are required to removed all metal parts of clothing for xray scanning. (As well as our shoes sometimes) Also an article saying that there were many more would-be soe bombers out there: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1729022.stm

And of course, the reason that we are so restricted in carrying liquids through security: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot .

I dont see why people have such problems with the current security measures, if they are intended to prevent things like the above from happening?

sebastianlieken

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I wouldn't find that funny at all, even if written properly.

Oh my god, the spelling policeman with a banana shoved up his hole. :rolleyes:

It's merely an illustration of the flaws in protocal. I'm trying to emphasise the point of how a potentially lethal weapon can get through an overhyped and exagerated system. I find it amusing that this is possible in todays paranoia fueled security checks. But alas, we obviously seem to have different senses of humour.

tracker-man

random_banter wrote: »

Richard Reid- the shoe bomber... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(terrorist) - part of the reason, I would presume, that we are required to removed all metal parts of clothing for xray scanning. (As well as our shoes sometimes) Also an article saying that there were many more would-be soe bombers out there: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1729022.stm

And of course, the reason that we are so restricted in carrying liquids through security: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot .

I dont see why people have such problems with the current security measures, if they are intended to prevent things like the above from happening?

I agree with you, but the argument is that these security measures aren't security measures as such, just an elaborate way of making us all feel safe and sound. Obviously they are doing some good and because there haven't been loads of newspaper articles on the subject of terrorists getting past security doesn't
Mean the checks aren't working, but that they act as a major deterrent.

Re: getting a stanley knife past security, seeing what you can get past every day, real mature, especially from a member of staff.

Davidth88

R

ichard Reid- the shoe bomber... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(terrorist) - part of the reason

No no no , you are missing my point , he WASN'T stopped in security. Nor were the ' liquid guys ' , the former was only caught because he was couldn't light a match , the latter because of intel.

Show me a person who WAS stopped in security , had a knife/gun, or whatever and was then successfully prosecuted as having a plot to hijack/destroy an aircraft.

I suspect no one can.

parsi

robinph wrote: »

Get rid of liquid ban and get rid of restrictions on size of hand luggage for starters. The amount of carry on I have is between me and the airline carrying me, it is not a security issue in the slightest. There is no need for the bans on things like nail clippers and razors either.

Agreed about liquids. However you can officially take on razors.

qnhhpa

they act as a major deterrent

Agreed.

getting a stanley knife past security, seeing what you can get past every day, real mature, especially from a member of staff.

May be immature and foolish, but really throws light on how effective or not all this 'security' is. Is all the inconvenience worth it if its just a PR exercise?

If its there just to assure people thats its safe to fly, it has to be balanced against the annoyance it causes which could put people off flying anyway.

I travelled to Europe by ferry and Eurotunnel last year on holiday and it was a much more relaxed and pleasant experience, if slower!

I don't want people not to fly - it pays my salary - safety is a priority but it has to be realistic and practical.

Why not scan everything and everybody with these super xray machines?

Why not make everyone travel naked with no luggage?

Why not ban everyone who looks suspect?

Why not just scan the baggage and scrutinise passengers without treating us all like terrorists?

As has been said by others - how many 'terrorists' have been stopped by security, before or after 9/11?

Only one I can think of is Michael Stone in Stormont...

FlutterinBantam

sebastianlieken wrote: »

Oh my god, the spelling policeman with a banana shoved up his hole. :rolleyes:

It's merely an illustration of the flaws in protocal. I'm trying to emphasise the point of how a potentially lethal weapon can get through an overhyped and exagerated system. I find it amusing that this is possible in todays paranoia fueled security checks. But alas, we obviously seem to have different senses of humour.

We most certainly do.
People like you give the Irish a bad name and demonstrate insecurity and social unawareness.

Guaranteed that every year some gink,who thinks he is funny boarding an Aer Lingus plane in JFK or elsewhere will make a bomb remark and wonder why he/she is arrested.
Then she/he will waste taxpayers money involving foreign affairs trying to prove.."Aaah sure he was only harmless"

grow up.

robinph

Probably not a complete list as I expect it's only including larger aircraft, but I came across this list from an article about a crash that just happened in Sudan:

Air disasters 1998 - now

Now what that list tells me is that far more time, effort and money should be spent on aircraft maintenance if you want to improve safety in the air than worrying about how many milliliters of water someone is carrying aboard with them.

interlocked

The biggest piece of metal that i carry is my watch which has a steel case and strap, i don't take it off going through the scanner, out of curiosity to see what happens. I've gone through over half a dozen times and nothing has happened.

So I take it that a pocketful of change or belt buckle wont make a lot of difference on their own??

Fabio

I've often forgotten my watch and it sets off the scanner....luck of the draw I suppose.