SATTSO

TSA Administrator John Pistole delivered a speech at George Washington University, as reported below. I started this thread in the "Practical" forum as this article provides specific examples and data regarding TSA screening. I Specifically, what may be of interest to members of FT is just what can be detected using AIT screening, as photos are provided in the article of actual items discovered, some large, some small, carried on passengers screened by AIT.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...ngers-in-2011/

At the bottom of the article, notice the size of the packet of cocaine discovered attached to a passengers body. It is photographed next to a driver's license and BP to provide scale (No, we do not look for illegal drugs, but this article provides practical information regarding what the AIT can detect. In my opinion. If the moderators feel this is in the wrong forum I am sure they will move it).

In other words, if you have a question as to what can the AIT detect (similar to what can be seen by a carry-on x-ray machine), this should provide some sort of answer.

Note, I am not making an argument in support the use of AIT, simply providing practical information as to what can be detected by these machines as reported by the media.

OldGoat

So, the article starts with a collection of weapons taken from someone at DFW. No where does the article say that the individual intended to do harm.

It shows cocaine. But finding cocaine is not the TSA's legislative mandate, and the article does not address whether or not the cocaine posed a threat to aviation.

Then the article shows a ceramic knife and a small packet of cocaine, but doesn't explain how they pose a threat to aviation.

My take away is that the AIT can find lots of stuff, but can't tell if that stuff poses a threat to aviation, and indeed, much of what is found is not a threat to aviation. The use of the AIT is simply a law enforcement dragnet.

SATTSO

Not responsing to anything you wrote: I post this as practical information for someone who may ask if they carry something on them, on their body or in their pocket, can it be seen by AIT? I believe this article serves a useful purpose in helping to answer those questions.

spd476

I realize these machines can find a lot of items, but don't they also generate a lot of false positives? I remember reading that Germany scrapped them because of that. They seemed to have problems with pleats and sweat. Besides the health and privacy issues, they seem to require more workers to resolve alarms than the traditional WTMD. Most of the catches isted on the TSA website are caught using the traditinal WTMD and x-ray machines. The ones I see caught by the AIT seem to be drugs, but they did catch someone with dangerous toothpaste recently.

DeafBlonde

By posting this for the purpose that you stated, are you implying that we, as airline passengers, are trying to smuggle "contraband" onto the aircraft? That is the impression that I get from your post.

Trust me, SATTSO, if I ask a question about what can/cannot be seen by the AIT, it pertains to how much of my body can be seen by the screener(s) in the viewing booth, not what I can/cannot carry on my body.

saulblum

The fact that Mr. Pistole is touting drug finds -- which pose absolutely not one bit of a threat to aviation security -- as successes of the TSA and of AIT in particular illustrates what is so completely wrong with the TSA.

Also, regarding the guns: Firstly, they were likely almost all found exclusively by traditional screening: WTMD and baggage x-rays. How many were found by AIT? Secondly, 1000 guns sounds like a lot until you factor in the number of passengers screened per year. Let's say it's 600 million. That means that 0.0001% of passengers were found with guns. There are over 60 million gun owners in the US. Is it inconceivable that 1000 of them would actually be careless enough to think they can bring their gun on-board or indeed forget they were carrying them? Hardly. Were any of 1000 gun owners planning on attacking the crew and passengers? Probably no, because we certainly would have heard about it to no end had further questioning revealed such intent.

Of course, the TSA defenders will ignore such reality and crow on and on. "We found 1000 guns! We found 700 grams of cocaine!"

squeakr

No name calling even of people you don't like.

thx

squeakr

co mod TS/S

SATTSO

I implied nothing by posting this. I believe your biases have colored your conclusions.

And it does not matter if I trust you or not. When I worked AIT, too many passengers were patted down because they assumed something left in their pocket would not or could not be seen, regardless of what that item was. And it does not matter if the item is harmless or a prohibited item (I know some here will make that argument - or try).

But think of it this way: a WTMD does not alarm on only prohibited metallic items. Many belts will alarm a WTMD. The WTMD can not tell the difference between a non-threatening metallic item and a possible metallic threat. If someone fails or refuses to remove a metallic item when they alarm the WTMD, the only way to resolve it then is to conduct secondary screening - which most people want to avoid. The same is true for AIT. The machine itself can not distinguish between a harmless item and a possible threat item. This is the standard for about all screening equipment, such as WTMD, HHMD, x-ray, etc. AIT is no different.

Now, add to that my experience when I have worked on the AIT and passengers required secondary screening (a pat down), because they left something in their pocket - and told me they didn't think the AIT could detect such an item, or didn't think that item in their pocket would cause an "alarm".

I post this as a resource - as it provides pictures of size - of items that can be detected, as reported by the media.

In NO way is this thread an argument for any personal opinion of mine.

Many of you who post on FT may be expert passengers and know exactly what to do. But some are not, and we have new FT members come all the time asking questions. Many people who post on FT will go through the AIT, even if they do not like it. This thread is to provide a possible resource so some here will have an idea of what needs to be removed from their pocket before they are screened by AIT - small items left in your pocket can result in secondary screening. Which I assume that most people want to avoid.

I have no other purpose in starting this thread.

goalie

It looks like the TSA has found 100 more guns
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/check...ints-year.html

SNA_Flyer

I guess the AIT still cant detect C4 Butt Plugs.

OldGoat

Fair enough. In the spirit in which you posted I have a question: We these items identified by the AIT, or was something unidentified seen by the AIT, only to be identified in a manual search?

WillCAD

Yes, I'd like to know the answer to that one.

I'd also like to know the current stats from TSA's internal testing team - aren't they called the Red Team or something like that? - on how many prohibited items are MISSED by the various screening methods, including AIT, WTMD, and carry-on x-ray. I believe a leaked report a few years ago put that missed percentage at somewhere around 73%, didn't it? Has that percentage improved significantly through use of AIT? Has it improved significantly at checkpoints which don't employ AIT? What is the failure rate for the AIT itself?

Touting how many guns and knives or how much coke you FOUND is absolutely meaningless grandstanding unless you divulge how much you MISSED, as well. If you found 1,000, but let 3,703 get through... that's not something I'd call even remotely successful.

SATTSO

Um, I already stated that - without having to be asked. I've actually stated it many times in many threads... I stated it above in this thread... so I am not sure why you are asking me this... but...


AIT only "alarms". The search identifies what alarmed. Just as I said above. This is just like WTMD, just like x-ray, just like HHMD. There is almost no screening equipment that identifies a threat/prohibited item. Secondary searches identify what alarmed.


In fact, here is the post above in which I already answered your question. Post number 8 http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/17431910-post8.html

To quote from that post, #8:

"But think of it this way: a WTMD does not alarm on only prohibited metallic items. Many belts will alarm a WTMD. The WTMD can not tell the difference between a non-threatening metallic item and a possible metallic threat. If someone fails or refuses to remove a metallic item when they alarm the WTMD, the only way to resolve it then is to conduct secondary screening - which most people want to avoid. The same is true for AIT. The machine itself can not distinguish between a harmless item and a possible threat item. This is the standard for about all screening equipment, such as WTMD, HHMD, x-ray, etc. AIT is no different."


I am honestly at a loss. I have no idea how I can be more clear about how various screening equipment works.

saulblum

I believe that the question is not whether AIT identified a particular item as a threat.

The question is, would the same guns and knives have been found 15 years ago, using a WTMD and baggage x-ray.

In other words, would the items have been found anyway, even if AIT never entered the picture.

N965VJ

�More than 10 years after the Sept. 11 attacks, people are still trying to bring deadly weapons into the cabin of an airplane,� TSA administrator John Pistole said at George Washington University�s Homeland Security Policy Institute.

�On Tuesday, just two days ago, we detected nine guns passengers had in their carry-on bags at various checkpoints around the country.� Pistole said.

/golf_clap

Firearms have been caught at the checkpoint for decades before the TSA came on the scene with their annual budget now approaching $9 billion. The TSA trots out statistics of what they've found to create the aura that they are fighting back waves of tewwowists, when in fact they are catching ordinary citizens with a concealed carry permit that have an "Oh, crap!" moment at the checkpoint on their annual commercial flight somewhere. On average, the same number of LEOs are caught trying to transit the checkpoint with a firearm as well. For many LEOs and people that have a CCW, leaving the house with a firearm is no different than remembering to grab their cell phone.