Increased flight security following attempted terrorist attack

[wideeyes]

cheaper flights then

and put people out of jobs.

 

[mikki.young]

I'm strongly reminded of what it was like for tourism in the UK when the IRA were at their height of terrorism activity. It was not good for business, tourists or the country as a whole. America may suffer in the same way and then the terrorists have won in one sense.

We all want to co-operate with being safer but knee jerk reactions that are not thought through are more likely to put tourism out of business than fix things. Hopefully when Obamas full review is completed some sensible precautions will be in place - and maybe more targeted and/or random so they are less predictable and harder to get round.

 

[tinks_1989]

and put people out of jobs.

it was a joke

 

[bavaria]

Of course you are. Just please don't attack me. Okay? I'm not attacking you, or anyone else. Calm down.

You'll need to ask someone in authority why the law is being enacted.

The TSA is an American branch of government, so naturally the only thing they have control over is what happens over America! Why in heaven's name would they even try to address issues over the Atlantic or over Europe? They have no authority to do so!

I stumbled across this thread somewhat late, and hopefully you don't take my response as an attack. I do feel however that you are missing several key facts and felt the need to respond.

The TSA ABSOLUTELY is involved outside of America. They actually approved the airport in Lagos as meeting ICAO standards just a few weeks ago, as an example. TSA has IIRs and regulatory inspectors around the world, and determines if airlines are premitted to fly to the US, and from which airports.

There is a thread on the Transportation Board which outlines many of the same facts listed here and explains how the security in international airports is often far higher than in American airports.

And TSA even controls the sky. They want to have the data on all passengers flying OVER US territory, even if they will never land in the US. That means that someone flying from Canada to Latin America for instance would have their information submitted to the TSA in order to fly.

The rules often violate the rights of citizens and the laws of those countries, but unless airlines comply, they cannot fly to the US. The example above violates the privacy laws of Canada, and yet if airlines want to fly OVER a piece of the US they must comply, and thus violate those laws of their own citizens.

Please understand that it is frustrating and disheartening to read how many posters here think that international airports should change their standards to meet the US standards, when those standards have long been and remain lower than outside the US. Even almost a decade after 9/11, PPBM (positive passenger bag match) is not in place on domestic flights in the US, for example.

Imagine if the discussion were reversed, and another country came to the US and implemented rules which violated the civil rights, the gun laws, or the constitution of the country, and you may understand why people are upset.

This episode however is finally bringing to the forefront what many have said for years - that the current security system at US airports is not adequate. Hopefully it will drive change in the future.

I encourage anyone who appears passionate about this topic (such as Obi Wan and a few others) to post on the Transportation Board thread. Unfortunately there is a lack of international presence over there, as well as a lack of facts about the subject.

 

[bavaria]

'New' rules come into effect as of midnight tonight (just announced but I cannot yet find an official media link)

They only address inbound 'international' flights and seem to be just reinforcing existing checks already in place, and implementing new checks on passengers holding passports and/or travelling from certain countries.

Nothing to address domestic security.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31122.html#ixzz0ba6VdhU6

All travelers flying into the U.S. from foreign countries will receive tightened random screening, and 100 percent of passengers from 14 terrorism-prone countries will be patted down and have their carry-ons searched, the Obama administration was notifying airlines on Sunday.

Edited to add this link

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Wo...ns_Checks_On_Passengers_Flying_In_From_Abroad

 

[Cyrano]

Good to see you posting here Bavaria with some very interesting info

 

[HeresYourEars]

I stumbled across this thread somewhat late, and hopefully you don't take my response as an attack. I do feel however that you are missing several key facts and felt the need to respond.

The TSA ABSOLUTELY is involved outside of America. They actually approved the airport in Lagos as meeting ICAO standards just a few weeks ago, as an example. TSA has IIRs and regulatory inspectors around the world, and determines if airlines are premitted to fly to the US, and from which airports.

There is a thread on the Transportation Board which outlines many of the same facts listed here and explains how the security in international airports is often far higher than in American airports.

And TSA even controls the sky. They want to have the data on all passengers flying OVER US territory, even if they will never land in the US. That means that someone flying from Canada to Latin America for instance would have their information submitted to the TSA in order to fly.

The rules often violate the rights of citizens and the laws of those countries, but unless airlines comply, they cannot fly to the US. The example above violates the privacy laws of Canada, and yet if airlines want to fly OVER a piece of the US they must comply, and thus violate those laws of their own citizens.

Please understand that it is frustrating and disheartening to read how many posters here think that international airports should change their standards to meet the US standards, when those standards have long been and remain lower than outside the US. Even almost a decade after 9/11, PPBM (positive passenger bag match) is not in place on domestic flights in the US, for example.

Imagine if the discussion were reversed, and another country came to the US and implemented rules which violated the civil rights, the gun laws, or the constitution of the country, and you may understand why people are upset.

This episode however is finally bringing to the forefront what many have said for years - that the current security system at US airports is not adequate. Hopefully it will drive change in the future.

I encourage anyone who appears passionate about this topic (such as Obi Wan and a few others) to post on the Transportation Board thread. Unfortunately there is a lack of international presence over there, as well as a lack of facts about the subject.

Thank you for the information, which you posted in such an informative and respectful way.

I do understand the frustration.

 

[bavaria]

Good to see you posting here Bavaria with some very interesting info

And sadly it was your little corner of the world which didn't get my revenue this week as I was planning to transit via the US and never made it for my holiday plans last week. I took a detour instead! But based on the online chatter, it will be America in the long term which suffers economically if people choose to vacation or do business elsewhere.

HYE, I may sound passionate but I fly almost every week around the globe, and have spent a large amount of times in airports and clearing security in a large range of countries in both the developed and developing worlds. I spent most of the last year working around Asia and certainly saw some very high standards.

Add in the events at EWR tonight, and hopefully there will be more changes forthcoming.

(For those of you not aware, one of the major US airports had a 'terminal dump' tonight sending all the pasengers out into -10 degree F temperature - sorry, don't know what that equates to in our terms but I do know that it is COLD!)

And why did that happen? The exit to the secure area simply has a sign, and is supposed to be guarded by a human to prevent someone from accidentally leaving and returning, or bypassing security. In many airports around the world that function is served by one way sliding doors (or one way doors like we see in shops)

Those are the types of things which frustrate many of us - a quite simple solution would be to have secured doors, yet on the same day another high ranking US official says that international airports are not up to standard.

And as a side note, I have never been on the TSA-bashing wagon here; I respect the individuals who are just doing their job. But this is an overall policy and the agency really seems to be struggling.

 

[orlandothebeagle]

and put people out of jobs.

I think it was a tongue in cheek remark

I stumbled across this thread somewhat late, and hopefully you don't take my response as an attack. I do feel however that you are missing several key facts and felt the need to respond.

The TSA ABSOLUTELY is involved outside of America. They actually approved the airport in Lagos as meeting ICAO standards just a few weeks ago, as an example. TSA has IIRs and regulatory inspectors around the world, and determines if airlines are premitted to fly to the US, and from which airports.

There is a thread on the Transportation Board which outlines many of the same facts listed here and explains how the security in international airports is often far higher than in American airports.

And TSA even controls the sky. They want to have the data on all passengers flying OVER US territory, even if they will never land in the US. That means that someone flying from Canada to Latin America for instance would have their information submitted to the TSA in order to fly.

The rules often violate the rights of citizens and the laws of those countries, but unless airlines comply, they cannot fly to the US. The example above violates the privacy laws of Canada, and yet if airlines want to fly OVER a piece of the US they must comply, and thus violate those laws of their own citizens.

Please understand that it is frustrating and disheartening to read how many posters here think that international airports should change their standards to meet the US standards, when those standards have long been and remain lower than outside the US. Even almost a decade after 9/11, PPBM (positive passenger bag match) is not in place on domestic flights in the US, for example.

Imagine if the discussion were reversed, and another country came to the US and implemented rules which violated the civil rights, the gun laws, or the constitution of the country, and you may understand why people are upset.

This episode however is finally bringing to the forefront what many have said for years - that the current security system at US airports is not adequate. Hopefully it will drive change in the future.

I encourage anyone who appears passionate about this topic (such as Obi Wan and a few others) to post on the Transportation Board thread. Unfortunately there is a lack of international presence over there, as well as a lack of facts about the subject.

Thanks for posting, I feel your frustration, I have to be honest and say I really dont care who or what they has/have any info on me,If it makes it easier to protect me and others then?? really I have nothing to hide like 99% of us, it just doesnt bother me. Now I KNOW thats not the point, but just my views.
I can hardly believe thet dont have ppbm on local flights
SOme pp said usa dropped the ball, I believed at the time they were correct, noe they have had it confirmed by no less than BO

 

[HeresYourEars]

And sadly it was your little corner of the world which didn't get my revenue this week as I was planning to transit via the US and never made it for my holiday plans last week. I took a detour instead! But based on the online chatter, it will be America in the long term which suffers economically if people choose to vacation or do business elsewhere.

HYE, I may sound passionate but I fly almost every week around the globe, and have spent a large amount of times in airports and clearing security in a large range of countries in both the developed and developing worlds. I spent most of the last year working around Asia and certainly saw some very high standards.

Add in the events at EWR tonight, and hopefully there will be more changes forthcoming.

(For those of you not aware, one of the major US airports had a 'terminal dump' tonight sending all the pasengers out into -10 degree F temperature - sorry, don't know what that equates to in our terms but I do know that it is COLD!)

And why did that happen? The exit to the secure area simply has a sign, and is supposed to be guarded by a human to prevent someone from accidentally leaving and returning, or bypassing security. In many airports around the world that function is served by one way sliding doors (or one way doors like we see in shops)

Those are the types of things which frustrate many of us - a quite simple solution would be to have secured doors, yet on the same day another high ranking US official says that international airports are not up to standard.

And as a side note, I have never been on the TSA-bashing wagon here; I respect the individuals who are just doing their job. But this is an overall policy and the agency really seems to be struggling.

I'm so sorry for the increased difficulties for people flying in, out and around the USA, bavaria. I mean that sincerely.

 

[jharrowell]

I've not seen this in the thread but there has been an update on the hand baggage policy on the VA website:

---------------------------------------------
UPDATE FOR PASSENGERS TRAVELLING TO THE USA


Hand baggage allowances are now back to normal.

Extra security measures remain in place for all flights to the USA, however from 1 January 2010 we will revert to our usual hand baggage policy.

View your hand baggage allowance for all routes.

---------------------------------------------