Boggie Dog

I would guess that on any given flight most passengers are vacation/leisure flyers and the cost for Pre Check just isn't worth the cost verus the number of flights they take in a years time. Yes, lots of people fly everyday but for the most part they are different people each day and that is where TSA Pre Check misses the mark.

If TSA wants vetted passengers then do it for free, require no in person interview, and use current law enforcement databases to make determinations. Doing so would allow for Pre Check style screening for the majority of travelers and let TSA focus their energy on the remaning unknown or higher risk passengers.

GUWonder

If it's 4% of US check-ins with PreCheck eligible carriers, I would be surprised. If it's 4% of named individuals in some USG database of passengers (and maybe airline crew), that would not surprise me.

When Pistole told the U.S. Senate that 40% are getting expedited screening, he included U12s, senior citizens over 75 years of age and flight crew. I don't recall if the question asked of him was limited to PreCheck or to the broader category of expedited screening.

chollie

One very real example: if you were a frequent flyer - or even an infrequent flyer with a family - who flies out of PHX, would you pony up $85/yr/pax for a service that is rarely and inconsistently available?

petaluma1

Weren't something like 85% of passengers flying on a given day supposed to be PreCheck at this point in time?

No wonder Pistole said that "millions more" enrolees were needed to make the program work as it was "intended."

Speaking to Chollie's point:

I'm willing to wager that the TSA expected even those infrequent flyers to enroll with all their kith and kin and that just didn't and won't materialize.

jkhuggins

TSA can get there quite easily. All it has to do is give up on the $17/year fee, payable in five-year chunks. The efficiencies that TSA would gain from performing its "background check" on anyone willing to enroll would more than compensate for the loss in fees.

Given that I fly only 1-2 times a year, and sometimes through airports that don't have Pre-Check, it's simply not worth my money to apply.

chollie

Any airport large enough to have a dedicated elite line should have a dedicated Pre line, and like the elite line, it should be open and staffed at all times.

I just can't see anyone ponying up his/her $ for a 'maybe' or a 'lite' experience.

FliesWay2Much

Quite the opposite at Dulles....





And, a post from a knowledgeable FTer...

KRSW

For me, the $100 Global Entry fee was worth it after being stuck in a security screening line @ JFK for nearly 90 minutes of standing. I have a health condition which normally doesn't interfere with my life...but 90 minutes straight of standing and not moving put me (and my health) in a bad position. If I knew it was going to be THAT bad I would have at least gotten a wheelchair for the wait. I signed up for GE the following day after I recovered.

A snow storm had come and left and air travel was starting to return to normal. TSA had a single Pre-Check/Crew/Elite lane open and a single regular lane open and that was it for the whole terminal. To process probably 400-600 pax all trying to leave and of course they insisted on running everyone through the nude-o-scope (I opted out). They had plenty of people standing around to open more lanes, but they didn't. Fortunately the airline was fully aware and was holding planes, but this was causing delays throughout their network that day.

Boggie Dog

Shouldn't the discussion center around effective deployment of TSA resources instead of getting 4% of flyers through expedited screening?

mikeef

Absolutely it should. The easiest solution would be to make pre-check-level security the standard.

Mike

BSBD

Speaking of which - it seemed that after a period of frequent PreCheck "random alarms" requiring additional screening, the "random alarms" fell down to a seemingly more "random" low number.

Now, my observations show that alarms are once again increasing in frequency, only they don't call them "random" anymore. I learned yesterday in ATL that TSA now refers to them as "quotas."

The "quota" designation means that they now have a set level of PreCheck pax per day that must undergo additional screening, i.e. hand swab, scanner, or patdown.

chollie

I wonder if the advertising for Pre spells all this out: it may not be available at some airports, even large ones like PHX, it may only be offered in modified form (Pre LITE), you are still subject to quota random additional searches, including but not limited to gropes for those who are physically incapable of assuming and holding the position for the NoS.

A family of four that flies once a year could easily spend $300+ and, particularly if they fly out of PHX, never once get a full Pre experience.

Boggie Dog

As jkhuggins mentioned up thread we all don't fly often enough to make Pre Check much of a bargain. I departed DFW last week and the airline gifted us with Pre. Making two legs tomorrow and again gifted with Pre on both legs. No status and these flights are miles redemptions.

I think Pre style screening should be given to every traveler that has a track record with an airline. Focus on the unknowns.

petaluma1

Those infrequent flyers, who are the majority of flyers, are exactly the reason that PreCheck has not been the be-all and end-all that the TSA thought it would be.

Boggie Dog

Witnessed at MIA this morning, regular screening lanes clobbered with people and the Pre lane had no one in it until I showed up. After clearing TSA watched at least two groups of TSA screeners walking terminal D asking for documents. These people must be excess if they are not needed to clear screening backlogs and another indication that TSA is overstaffed.