Himeno

Only if they want to buy items which are age restricted by law (ie, liquor).

pacer142

Interesting that the airlines don't already do this for revenue protection reasons. In the UK there's no rule saying that you have to show ID for domestic flights, and I believe for some (BA?) you don't need to. But most airlines require it off their own back, mainly to prevent people transferring tickets, though sometimes incorrectly justified as for "security reasons".

Neil

thadocta

All Australian domestic airlines sell only one-way tickets, there is no such beastie as having a return being cheaper than two one-ways, so it would not actually be depriving the carrier of revenue if a ticket is transferred.

Dave

pacer142

BA do sell return tickets, and in certain circumstances don't require photo ID. The low-costs all sell one-way tickets, and they do require photo ID. UK train tickets (except self-printed ones) do not require names or ID at all, and a return is usually only pennies more expensive than one-way. (Transferring rail tickets is illegal, but it happens regardless and is somewhat difficult to enforce).

It isn't about selling on return halves. It's about speculatively booking tickets when they are cheap, and reselling them when they are expensive - touting, if you like. Disallowing name changes other than minor spelling corrections (or charging up to the current fare if you do allow them) makes this work, but only if you check ID!

OT, but I'm surprised that given the problem with touting of gig tickets that these don't have your name on them and require ID as well.

Neil

neko

I don't recall any Schengen countries that check ID and boarding pass at security, though they all check that you have a boarding pass (paper or electronic).

For domestic and intra-EU (intra-Schengen), some airlines check ID at the gate, but definitely not all and not in all countries. Sometimes it seems pretty random.

Trying to recall from some recent flights... No check domestic Sweden or intra-Scandinavia on SK, at least with an SK frequent flyer card. No check on LH departing from Germany (automated boarding pass reader). Recent flight to BCN via ZRH was checked on only of four legs (BCN-ZRH) - I remember that one because I couldn't keep track of whether to keep my passport in my bag or my hand.

guflyer

Here is a link to the latest news regarding the introduction of body scanners to Australia.

http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-...725-1hw8s.html

This is listed as a trial for secondary screening. Does this mean that body scanners will eventually only be used for secondary screening there? I am still also wondering whether opt out will be possible there and if there is any hope that after the trial, Australia will decide not to keep the body scanners.

stifle

The article does point out that being scanned is an optional alternative to being patted down if a passenger triggers the WTMD.

I'm in MEL in the back end of October (the trial there runs in September) so I'll see how things are.

Pesky Monkey

Which is the same idiocy the U.S. uses as pat downs don't find anything metal, such as rivets in jeans.
I can only hope you do not follow.

RadioGirl

I'm not flying internationally from SYD in August but will keep an ear to the ground about any feedback. It's interesting that the trial is only 18 days in SYD and 26 days in MEL; I don't know whether that suggests a token trial before abandoning the idea, or a token "trial" before making it permanent.
FWIW, until my hip surgery, I regularly wore Levis (metal zippers, rivets etc) and a wristwatch through the WTMD at many Australian airports and never set them off. So unless they retune the WTMD, it would only be alarming on major metal items. Such as, unfortunately, my titanium hip.

Also, the patdown at Australian airports is not as bad as the TSA version. The longest I've waited is ~45 seconds, and the longest it's taken is about 90 seconds. It's hard to imagine the Aussie security screeners making the patdown worse to try to force people through the NoS.

RadioGirl

Just saw a snippet on the preview for the TV news, and found this on the interwebs: Sydney Airport trials full body scanners

Key points:
1. Appears to be MMW (the picture in the link above isn't clear but the TV news image looked like the MMW phone-booth setup. Linked article compares exposure to mobile phone power but politicians are idiots, so that's not necessarily indicative.)

2. Uses ATR with the security person at the scanner instead of a backroom perv.

3. "The program is voluntary and any passengers not wanting to try the scanner will go through the standard screening procedures."

I'd prefer not to see this at all, but the health and privacy issues seem to be mitigated, and "standard screening" in Australia is quite reasonable. (I had a patdown last week in CBR which was not at all invasive or rude, and yet the woman doing it was apologetic throughout.)

I have a (very technical) colleague flying out of SYD int'l during the trial and will try to get a front-line report.

ETA: Comments on news sites seem overwhelmingly against the scanner. Radiation concerns (?), privacy, "why does Australia need this?", accusations of political boondoggles. I'm proud of my adopted fellow countrymen!

goback

I saw this on the news too. Couldn't believe the trash coming from the Minister's mouth about it being so necessary. The ABC news basically said 'authorities have made their decision', which is disappointing, I thought they might ask at least some questions, but perhaps they are trying to keep in the good books of the government.

stifle

Well, as I see it, it's no biggie (yet).

• Old process: WTMD. If you beep, pat-down.
• New process: WTMD. If you beep, you choose pat-down or scan.

Obviously if it becomes beep = scan (like MAN), or if the pat-down is different than before, all bets are off.

Himeno

I saw a story about the SYD trial in The Daily Telegraph today. The story claimed the machine uses radio waves. I sent an SMS to the editor correcting that.

I've been looking for an online version of the story which I can comment on, but haven't had any luck finding a site which allows comments.

The Courier Mail site's story says:
I think we might need to spam the idiotic Anthony Albanese.

guflyer

This part scares me. Does this mean that there will be no opt out available after the trial is over (as in Britain)? And is this just going to be used in the international terminals, or will it also be used in the domestic terminals?

Is there any hope of preventing this from ruining travel in Australia? I always find travel within Australia to be a pleasure. I know that the country's tourism industry is already having financial problems. The country does not need something to make the experience worse for everyone.

Himeno

This is the info on the trial/scanners that the government is spewing.

http://travelsecure.infrastructure.g...info_sheet.pdf
http://travelsecure.infrastructure.g...assessment.pdf
http://travelsecure.infrastructure.g...fact_sheet.pdf
and a feedback contact
[email protected]