I've had it. With the news that the FAA has mandated swabbing of cell phones, I am declaring a personal moratorium on air travel for February. I have put up with way more BS than I should have to and now we have this as well. I'm sorry, but I just don't have 3 hours per travel day to waste on this nonsense. The technology to screen passengers and bags effectively exists already but the FAA and the airlines refuse to deploy it intelligently. On top of that, despite having paid hundreds to thousands of dollars in PFC charges that are supposed to go towards improving airports (I guess security is not a part of the airport), I am now expected to pony up an additional $10 per trip so that I can be further hassled, er "protected". I'm drawing the line. No travel for February unless the BS stops.

------------------
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

I'm with you 100%. The airlines won't be getting another cent from me until they understand MY *security* concerns.

I haven't had any problems with the security, despite traveling through several of the busiest airports in the country. Have you folks taken your issues up with the DOT, making some reasonable suggestions, or do you prefer to complain here and to the security screeners, neither of which will actually change anything?

I suggest that you consistently contact the DOT and making _reasonable_ suggestions, so that when the feds take over the security screening things get better. Not flying isn't going to change things.

d

My guess is that some notebook was found in Afghanistan which showed using a cell phone for terrorism. This is my guess why cell phones are swabbed.

In commercial aviation, all changes used to be a result of a crash. For example, smoke detectors in lavatories resulted after the Air Canada burned up on a DFW-YYZ flight at CVG in the 80's. Someone is trying to CYA for this one, I suspect.

IMO a boycott of this type will have no effect at all nor do I think that the situation is bad enough to warrant a boycott(and I have already been extensively searched 6 out of 8 times this year). Reasonable letters to the media, Congress, and the airlines is the way to go. Even if you don't have solutions to offer at least describe your experiences. Hopefully it will keep the pressure on the so called experts to find a more workable solution.

I'm with you on this one. The last time I checked, the FAA Aviation Trust Fund was sitting at around $12 billion. This is money that they have already taken from us (in ticket taxes and fees) supposedly for aviation safety but have not spent. Since they took our money under false pretenses the first time (and did not spend it for what it was earmarked for), why should anybody expect this new extortion (sorry, I mean tax) to be any different? This is just another Congressional scam. We've already paid.

I'm not sure I'm with you on this one, Spiff. Yeah, the security measures seem to be ineffectual and late, and yeah we seem to be paying for more than we're getting, but on the whole it could be worse.

I'm leaving on Thursday for a mileage run to LHR via ORD. Got a good fare.

Security is still being run by the same people, the lame security companies. Since they know they're getting axed anyway, there's really no reason for them to clean up their act.

Not that I'm a fan of the government taking over, but with enough pressure, maybe they'll make an effort to clean this situation up.

d

I'm as frustrated as anyone else, but I'm not sure how denying revenue to the airlines forces the government toward a less psychotic security enforcement program.

Amen! I've been saying since October that the decline in air travel is not so much due to the economy, but rather the HASSLE of traveling today.

Obviously all of us want to fly safely, but the current situation is ridiculous. There is not a single "security measure" that has been implemented by the FAA which would have prevented what happened on September 11. The additional "security" is only a PR move to make the public believe they are safer and the imperial federal government of the United States is looking after them.

Boy did we get screwed by our government on the security screeners. They billed us for stepped up security, which most Americans are willing to pay. But instead of better security, we get the same high school dropout morons that we had before. Just look at the latest SF United terminal shutdown as an example of their intelligence.

Why is it that foreign airports have much better security, but not the two-hour lines?

I think a boycott is absolutely the way to go. Unfortunately, in order for it to be noticed a lot of people have to participate. Count me in!

The PFC charge was not "earmarked" entirely for airport safety. That was a small part of it, I'm sure, however most of it was earmarked for airport expansion and improvements. At the time the PFC was started security was not thought to be an area that required major improvements. The FAA was more concerned with the problem of over capacity at our major airports and the nations air system being over loaded. As well, a better Air Traffic system was something they were concerned with. I can't say that I read too much in the news about the government being concerned too much about the security procedures at most airports.

What about the stronger cockpit doors and orders to not comply with terrorists? Neither of those would have had an effect on September 11th? Or running the passenger manifests through the FBI watch list (some of the terrorists from 9/11 would have been on it)? How about the an increased likelihood of the boxcuters and other makeshift weapons being found at the security checkpoint or in a random search at the gate?

None of these would have had any affect on September 11th? I find that hard to believe, maybe I'm crazy.

Regardless, let's not get too worried about preventing what happened in September again. That's one thing that we should consider, but we also need to consider people trying to bring bombs on board in their checked luggage, shoes or carry-ons, people trying to get weapons on in one way or another, etc...

d

A boycott is only effective when a large enough group participates. Even if everyone on FT participated, it would only be a drop in the bucket. What we need is a large organized effort. The internet may be a good way of organizing something. But sending emails to everyone would cause "spamming" problems. Any other ideas?

I appreciate your responses. I know that a more organized effort would be needed in order to make a serious impact. I will be writing letters to my congress people voicing my concerns but again, as long as the masses continue to go along with these long lines and (mostly) pointless "security" implementations, we will continue to see more of this nonsense.

I am not done traveling by air. In fact, I will resume flying in March. I just need to get away from airports where I am subjected to gross stupidity for awhile. I hope it will improve by the time I am ready to return to the skies, however I am not optimistic. Still, a break will do wonders for my aggravation level.

------------------
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

I'm aware of that. What I was really talking about is the 7% aviation tax built into the ticket price (before PFC's are tacked on).