Originally Posted by
petaluma1
This sounds to me as if TSA was testing the dog. Otherwise, why ETD all the passengers? Perhaps I am wrong, but sniffer dogs don't stand in place to do their job. Part of the "fun" of the job for the dog is moving, going to the target rather than having the target come to the dog.
The penalty box was about 4' by 15', large enough that the dog was constantly in motion, walking around the edge of the box, sniffing travelers as they filed past.
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
I fail to see the need for both Explosive Sniffer Dog and Explosive Trace Portal. Seems to be a duplication of effort.
Not ETD portals, ETD swab machines.
I do see it as justified. Dogs are not 100% accurate. ETD tests are not 100% accurate. Using both decreases the possibility of missing the scent.
However, in this case it was done with TSA's typical wasteful overkill, by deploying a dozen ETD machines, each with a TSO, and swabbing every single traveler who passed through the line. With the dog there to back it up, I think it's only necessary to swab random travelers, about every 5 or 10 people, perhaps. But I see this overkill as a sign that the MCO FSD obviously had no faith in those new-fangled K9 thingies.
Originally Posted by
BSBD
"TSA" and "duplication of effort" go hand-in-hand. Just one example: automated sterile area exit doors with alarms and mechanisms that prevent pax from entering through the exit, yet they are all manned by a TSO.
Again, no faith by the local FSD in the technology that he spent so much (of our) money installing. "What if it doesn't work?" they always ask. Well, sure tech breaks down, but if you second-guess every machine in the universe, we'd still have torches in every building, in case those new-fangled electric light thingies suddenly stop working. It's all magical voodoo, you know, and magic makes up it's own mind about when to work and when not to!