TSORon

Its the age of computers, and we all believe what they tell us and not our own common sense. This story is a case in point, folks here believed that the TSA was at fault because of what they had read online. Half way down the first page of posts people started reading other things that caused them to question first assumptions (actually, I believe thats a record here).

I say bring back the GIGO button!

Fredd

Is JetBlue accurate to state "Our crewmembers followed the appropriate protocols..."?

In other words, is there any room for cognizant individuals to say "this is nonsense" or are these types of actions based on the mindless juggernaut that I suspect?

TSORon

No idea. I don’t work for JetBlue and do not know their protocols.

Let’s see. JetBlue asked for TSA’s assistance. TSA did so. TSA determined that there was nothing in the situation that was either caused by TSA or that TSA could do anything about. TSA went away. JetBlue OTOH, well they were left holding the bag that they had opened. None of the stories I have read about this one gave any real reason for JetBlue’s actions other than it was some kind of computer glitch. Personally, I cant think of any glitch that would have caused this, but then again we are talking about computers and with them just about anything is possible. I’d be looking at JetBlue for more details if I were that interested in the issue.

saulblum

Perhaps if there weren't a no-fly list, which denies passengers the right to travel without due process -- passengers who would be screened along with their belongings by the TSA's vaunted layers of security -- incidents like this would not happen. Plus we'd all be saving the millions of dollars necessary to tie in the computer systems of a myriad of airlines to the government's own systems. A sum which apparently wasn't enough in the case of JetBlue's systems.

Just a thought.

Fredd

You must be pleased that your hands are clean, as it were.

Chaos.Defined

Why else do you think gloves would be worn...

jkhuggins

Oh, I can easily think of glitches that would cause this ...

• The general algorithm that checks the names on the passenger list against the NFL doesn't implement the check regarding birthdates/ages.
• The child in question was a lap child, with a different sort of boarding pass. Probably the algorithms process lap children separately, and that algorithm might have a bug in it that hadn't been caught until now. (The occurrence of lap children is relatively rare; the occurrence of names on the NFL is extremely rare; the combination of the two is so exceedingly rare that it may never have been tested.)
• A mistake in data entry. All one needs is for the checkbox for "lap child" to be right next to the checkbox for "terrorist" "security concern", and someone clicks the wrong box in haste, and you've got yourself a story ...

Anyways ... "glitch" is a nice pleasant euphemism for what really happened: a screw-up by JetBlue. Whether the screw-up was at the airport, the reservation office, or months ago by the software developers is somewhat beside the point.

LarryJ

Sounds like that was exactly what happened. It took longer than "2 seconds" but was done in time for the family to travel on their originally scheduled flight.

One thing that would take more than "2 seconds" in such a situation would be making sure that the name that was flagged was actually the child's and not one of the adults. Something that someone who knows that they're on the list might do to avoid detection.

Generally not. The child-in-arms is often added to the passenger's record at the gate. Adding the child's full name, DOB, and gender to the record at the time of booking should prevent this from happening in the future.

It's not instant. (Takes more than "2 seconds") The system is designed for the information to be entered at the time of booking which allows some time for the checks to process before a boarding pass is issued.

jkhuggins

I wouldn't blame a lack of "common sense" for this. TSA et al. tell the public --- repeatedly --- that infants and children must be screened just as invasively thoroughly as adults, because terrorists have used innocent children to carry IEDs. It's not that far a leap from there to believing that children of terrorists might themselves be placed on an NFL/watch list.

GaryD

You are suggesting that jetBlue's computer system does actually compare names on the BPs against the entire US No-Fly and Watch Lists at the moment they are scanned at the gate, but it takes more than two seconds.

I disagree. I don't think they even have that capability.

This is the flaw in jetBlue's story. Your description of what the system is designed actually to do is irrelevant.

LarryJ

No, what I am saying is just the opposite.

The passenger's information is sent from the airline's computer reservation system (CRS) to the government's Secure Flight computer system. The Secure Flight system checks the data against the No-Fly and watch lists and returns the result of that check to the airline's CRS. This check is normally performed between the time of booking and the time of check-in.

If a child-in-arms is not entered into the reservation in the CRS until shortly before boarding then the check can not be completed prior to check-in, as is normally done. If only the name of the child is entered into the reservation, instead of the full compliment of Secure Flight data, then the check performed by the government's Secure Flight system will have a significantly higher chance of returning a false-positive.

LegalTender

Who else WOULD be called? JetBlue held the plane for 30 minutes after yanking the family. No other agency logically would follow-up even if they had never flagged the girl.

I don't believe the 'computer glitch' parable.

Somebody's "comfort level" was aroused.

GaryD

Again, your description of what the system is designed actually to do is irrelevant.

WillCAD asked:

"Does JetBlue's computer system actually compare names on the BPs against the entire US No-Fly or Watch List instantly at the moment they are scanned at the gate?"

You took issue with one of his adverbs ("It's not instant"), and then you disagreed with my characterization of your answer ("what I am saying is just the opposite").

But now you write, purportedly in explanation, that:

"If only the name of the child is entered into the reservation, instead of the full compliment of Secure Flight data, then the check performed by the government's Secure Flight system will have a significantly higher chance of returning a false-positive."

Begs the question. Can that "check performed by the government's Secure Flight system" be performed at the gate?

LarryJ

I don't understand the source of the confusion.

The JetBlue computer does not perform the check. The JetBlue computer forwards whatever information it has, when that information is entered, to the government's Secure Flight system then waits for the reply. The system does not give instant replies. The more information that is entered, the greater the accuracy of the reply.

If the news reports are accurate, it sounds as though the family boarded during the time between the information being entered and when the reply, with the false-positive match, was returned.

WillCAD

I think the questions are:

1) Does the JetBlue computer system forward passenger name and/or any other information to the government's Secure Flight system, at the time when the BP is scanned, to be checked against the no-fly and/or watch lists?

2) If this DOES happen, how long does it generally take for the Secure Flight system to send a reply to the JetBlue computer system that a passenger is on one of those lists?

3) If this reply does happen, where does it go? Does it sit in the JetBlue computer system? Is it emailed to a JetBlue executive? Does a notification pop up on the gate agent's computer screen, warning them not to close the door or push the aircraft back form the jet bridge?

4) If this reply does happen, does a notice that someone on the no-fly or watch list has just boarded an aircraft, get sent to the local TSA? What is the local TSA's response to this notice?