US pre-clearance in German airports
Sep 13, 2014, 8:50 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: BA, AA, SQ, UA, AC, WS, MR TIT
Posts: 8,658
US pre-clearance in German airports
Is there any chance we see that matter, of course in the far future, implemented in FRA or MUC ^^
http://atwonline.com/security/report...lities-europe?
http://atwonline.com/security/report...lities-europe?
Sep 13, 2014, 10:09 am
#2
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
Remodelling and rebuilding the planet seems to be more doable and more expedient than changing ancient laws and tedious US immigration rituals.
If ZRH and MUC can clear everyone in fractions of minutes, this should be the aspired to model.
If ZRH and MUC can clear everyone in fractions of minutes, this should be the aspired to model.
Sep 13, 2014, 10:12 am
#3
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: UA*G(1K), PC Diamond Amb, Marriott Titanium, Accor Platinum
Posts: 4,671
This whole article is just so confusing
Why should any airport (outside the US) request the introduction of such a measure?
If other countries started demanding "pre-clearance facilities", we'd run out of space at airports. I thought it was obvious that one would expand capacities at the point of entry if the wait times should be too long.
HTB.
"Pre-clearance, which is already in operation in Ireland, is a means of speeding the entry of passengers through US airports.
Pre-clearance checks are entirely separate from aviation security screening. The government has not received any request from a UK airport to introduce such measures."
Pre-clearance checks are entirely separate from aviation security screening. The government has not received any request from a UK airport to introduce such measures."
If other countries started demanding "pre-clearance facilities", we'd run out of space at airports. I thought it was obvious that one would expand capacities at the point of entry if the wait times should be too long.
HTB.
Sep 13, 2014, 11:57 am
#5
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Stuck on this planet - mainly in STR and LAX
Posts: 5,019
Actually a bad idea from a passenger viewpoint for people who have global entry. The last few times arriving in the US I made it thru immigration before the HON tagged bags even started to come out.
After reading some horror stories about the Etihad US preclearance I hope that they don't start this in Germany.
Sep 13, 2014, 2:51 pm
#6
Moderator: Lufthansa Miles & More, India based airlines, India, External Miles & Points Resources
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MUC
Programs: LH SEN
Posts: 48,161
MUC thought about it during the planning phase of the T2 satellite that will go live next summer, but decided against it.
After enjoying the kiosks for USC and ESTA pax with nearly no lines at immigration, I believe the US is cleaning up its act, so preclearance is probably not required.
After enjoying the kiosks for USC and ESTA pax with nearly no lines at immigration, I believe the US is cleaning up its act, so preclearance is probably not required.
Sep 13, 2014, 4:49 pm
#7
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SUV
Programs: UA *G MM
Posts: 7,017
Preclearance in Canada has Global Entry machines so one does not lose that benefit.
They send US immigration and custom officials (and pay them COLA and pay for their housing) to the foreign country so it is quite expensive for the US government to operate, but just a rounding error in its ridiculous Homeland security apparatus.
The downside, especially for economy passengers, is that it means that they have to get to the airport even earlier and connections became more problematic at a hub like FRA. Furthermore, the US customs officials can demand to inspect the connecting passenger's luggage, which becomes problematic for connecting pax.
Imagine the volume of pre-clearance at an airport like FRA with flights to every medium sized US city on LH. I think it only makes sense with O&D airports like Abu Dhabi and Shannon to name some non-Canadian examples. Very few people connect from Europe to the US via Canada.
They send US immigration and custom officials (and pay them COLA and pay for their housing) to the foreign country so it is quite expensive for the US government to operate, but just a rounding error in its ridiculous Homeland security apparatus.
The downside, especially for economy passengers, is that it means that they have to get to the airport even earlier and connections became more problematic at a hub like FRA. Furthermore, the US customs officials can demand to inspect the connecting passenger's luggage, which becomes problematic for connecting pax.
Imagine the volume of pre-clearance at an airport like FRA with flights to every medium sized US city on LH. I think it only makes sense with O&D airports like Abu Dhabi and Shannon to name some non-Canadian examples. Very few people connect from Europe to the US via Canada.
Sep 13, 2014, 4:56 pm
#8
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I hope it doesn't come to Germany, for the same reason I don't want to see this come to LHR.
US pushes more European countries to allow for US CBP pre-clearance facilities
"This US push in Europe for this kind of facility is motivated by the government's paranoia; it is not motivated by an interest in making travel easier/faster."
US pushes more European countries to allow for US CBP pre-clearance facilities
Originally Posted by GUWonder
The Administration wants to push out US border and other enforcement measures to: (a) further limit VWP country and/or US nationals from flying from (or via) Europe and possibly arriving in the US without the US physically vetting the passengers prior to flight; and (b) further limit people from less developed countries from arriving in the US and claiming asylum/refugee status.
Amongst other things, this US pursuit is meant to reduce: the possibility of the US aviation blacklists from being as readily evaded; and the possibility of fraudulent use of real passports to travel to the US.
I am not surprised our UK government lapdog agreed to this. I hope the other EU countries tell us to go pound sand rather than even taking steps to let us pay up for it in part or full (for then the US will just end up charging us more to travel internationally by hiking fees).
As long as the governments are having airport security screeners properly focusing on and engaging in effective interdiction of contraband weapons, explosives and incendiaries ("WEI") (via screening passengers, bags, cargo and other conveyance), and as long as the cockpits are secure, then I don't really care who is on my flight. Any bad actors missed by European authorities can be stopped without doing these CBP pre-clearance build outs -- stopped on arrival in the US and by effectively screening for WEIs prior to departure.
I find CBP PreClearance a time-wasting bottleneck way too often, and I find it unnecessary to secure my flights. If the UK does this, consider this another reason for me to minimize flying via the UK on my US-bound trips.
Amongst other things, this US pursuit is meant to reduce: the possibility of the US aviation blacklists from being as readily evaded; and the possibility of fraudulent use of real passports to travel to the US.
I am not surprised our UK government lapdog agreed to this. I hope the other EU countries tell us to go pound sand rather than even taking steps to let us pay up for it in part or full (for then the US will just end up charging us more to travel internationally by hiking fees).
As long as the governments are having airport security screeners properly focusing on and engaging in effective interdiction of contraband weapons, explosives and incendiaries ("WEI") (via screening passengers, bags, cargo and other conveyance), and as long as the cockpits are secure, then I don't really care who is on my flight. Any bad actors missed by European authorities can be stopped without doing these CBP pre-clearance build outs -- stopped on arrival in the US and by effectively screening for WEIs prior to departure.
I find CBP PreClearance a time-wasting bottleneck way too often, and I find it unnecessary to secure my flights. If the UK does this, consider this another reason for me to minimize flying via the UK on my US-bound trips.
Sep 13, 2014, 5:28 pm
#9
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: UA*G(1K), PC Diamond Amb, Marriott Titanium, Accor Platinum
Posts: 4,671
Imagine the volume of pre-clearance at an airport like FRA with flights to every medium sized US city on LH. I think it only makes sense with O&D airports like Abu Dhabi and Shannon to name some non-Canadian examples. Very few people connect from Europe to the US via Canada.
HTB.
Sep 13, 2014, 6:30 pm
#10
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
This latest US government push for the CBP preclearance arrangements at (non-Irish) European airports is driven by something else (namely, security paranoia), and these arrangements if implemented at (non-Irish) European airline hubs will slow things down for way more people and result in passengers spending more time in lines (and less time being able to stay in the premium passenger lounges during transits outside of the US on trips to the US).
Last edited by GUWonder; Sep 13, 2014 at 6:36 pm
Sep 13, 2014, 10:24 pm
#11
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 1,546
I've always wondered, what do other countries have to gain by allowing USCBP preclearance in their airport? I kind of get why Canada does it - it allows routes to airports in the US that might not have a USCBP presence, but those flights are short haul, flown by 737s or regional jets and also might make some connections to other parts of the world through Canadian airports on Canadian airlines possible. Ditto for preclearance at the few Caribbean airports that have it, it allows short haul flights to smaller cities (not sure if there actually are any though).
However, I can't imagine a preclearance facility at FRA is going to entice Lufthansa to add a long haul flight to a city in the US so small that it doesn't have it's own USCBP at its airport. Preclearance seems very one sided in favor of the US, I've never understood what Ireland or Abu Dhabi have to gain in this agreement. It's not reciprocal, I doubt the US would ever allow another country to preclear at US arports.
The only reason I can come up with is money, I'm assuming the US pays for the space taken up by a preclearance facility, but I'm sure it's at a discount and probably not as much as they could get from a Starbucks and Cinnabon in the same place.
However, I can't imagine a preclearance facility at FRA is going to entice Lufthansa to add a long haul flight to a city in the US so small that it doesn't have it's own USCBP at its airport. Preclearance seems very one sided in favor of the US, I've never understood what Ireland or Abu Dhabi have to gain in this agreement. It's not reciprocal, I doubt the US would ever allow another country to preclear at US arports.
The only reason I can come up with is money, I'm assuming the US pays for the space taken up by a preclearance facility, but I'm sure it's at a discount and probably not as much as they could get from a Starbucks and Cinnabon in the same place.
Sep 13, 2014, 10:49 pm
#12
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,265
Being tortured for one or two hours upon arriving in the US+A is annoying but not worth making concessions to less transparent demands.
Sep 13, 2014, 11:26 pm
#13
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I've always wondered, what do other countries have to gain by allowing USCBP preclearance in their airport? I kind of get why Canada does it - it allows routes to airports in the US that might not have a USCBP presence, but those flights are short haul, flown by 737s or regional jets and also might make some connections to other parts of the world through Canadian airports on Canadian airlines possible. Ditto for preclearance at the few Caribbean airports that have it, it allows short haul flights to smaller cities (not sure if there actually are any though).
However, I can't imagine a preclearance facility at FRA is going to entice Lufthansa to add a long haul flight to a city in the US so small that it doesn't have it's own USCBP at its airport. Preclearance seems very one sided in favor of the US, I've never understood what Ireland or Abu Dhabi have to gain in this agreement. It's not reciprocal, I doubt the US would ever allow another country to preclear at US arports.
The only reason I can come up with is money, I'm assuming the US pays for the space taken up by a preclearance facility, but I'm sure it's at a discount and probably not as much as they could get from a Starbucks and Cinnabon in the same place.
However, I can't imagine a preclearance facility at FRA is going to entice Lufthansa to add a long haul flight to a city in the US so small that it doesn't have it's own USCBP at its airport. Preclearance seems very one sided in favor of the US, I've never understood what Ireland or Abu Dhabi have to gain in this agreement. It's not reciprocal, I doubt the US would ever allow another country to preclear at US arports.
The only reason I can come up with is money, I'm assuming the US pays for the space taken up by a preclearance facility, but I'm sure it's at a discount and probably not as much as they could get from a Starbucks and Cinnabon in the same place.
Ireland wanted it -- not Aer Lingus -- in order to attract more service to Ireland to compete with Aer Lingus. Aer Lingus was not a fan of the idea when this first came up for consideration.
The UAE, AUH and EY wanted this so they paid for the bulk of it.
Sep 13, 2014, 11:27 pm
#14
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
He was referring to APC kiosks, not necessarily just Global Entry kiosks. An ESTA and post-2008 entry on a VWP country passport is sufficient to use at least some APC kiosks.
Sep 14, 2014, 3:37 pm
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
In the case of Canada, it consolidates US immigration in a handful of airports, opening up all sorts of US airports that don't have INTL services. Also, like at ORD, in some locations it makes transferring a breeze, instead of having to negotiate T5 you can just walk off one flight and onto another. Great convenience for travelers.