|
Originally Posted by trooper
(Post 16209394)
Avoid the firing range?
I travel to the USA regularly for target shooting competitions... so lots of my clothes/gear would be well contaminated by residue from the smokeless propellants I use.. especially my range bag which has done double duty as my carry on... never had a problem. I have even travelled with a powder thrower.. had THAT in my carry on (it's an expensive item and not terribly rugged) and presumably because it was an unusual looking thing they took it out of the bag and wiped the swab around the interior of the powder reservoir.... NO result... So.. from that experience.. I wouldn't be real concerned about flying after being at the range! :D do you use smokeless or black powder? :) |
Originally Posted by Caradoc
(Post 16210615)
And yet standing downwind of a fireworks show was enough to trigger the "puffer" machines in ATL before they were mothballed.
Golfing! In Phoenix! Must be a terrorist... |
Originally Posted by barbell
(Post 16211835)
Golfing was a high offense at PHX during this same period.
Golfing! In Phoenix! Must be a terrorist... |
A former colleague had his shoes confiscated by TSA after they tested positive. This was despite TSA's running them through the x-ray feeling them, etc. Said former colleague owned a farm and walked past a fertilizer spreader on the way to get in his car.
TSA refused to clear the shoes based solely on the ETD. He arrived at the corporate meeting shoeless. |
Originally Posted by clacko
(Post 16211457)
better a false positive than a false negative!....
a false negayive could ruin the day for a lot of people! Has there EVER been a documented case where the TSA has detected explosives in passenger luggage? You would think the TSA would make a big deal about this. Have they? |
Originally Posted by fishferbrains
(Post 16212675)
Let's turn this around for a moment:
Has there EVER been a documented case where the TSA has detected explosives in passenger luggage? You would think the TSA would make a big deal about this. Have they? The fellow who arrived at his meeting shoeless did have a great story to tell, though. That is priceless PR for our side.... |
Originally Posted by barbell
(Post 16211835)
Golfing was a high offense at PHX during this same period.
Golfing! In Phoenix! Must be a terrorist... When I got the secondary patdown in the private room (I know, shouldn't have allowed that) the machine kept alarming and the TSO made note of the fact that the machine was alarming way too much. When I commented on the fact that it appeared that they had some equipment issues he said, "It's all a bunch of crap." That's a direct quote. better a false positive than a false negative!.... a false negayive could ruin the day for a lot of people! I have several flights coming up in the next week out of SAN. It disturbs me greatly that my need to fly brands me as a suspect in the minds of the government and I may be forced to choose between irradiation or a grope. My flights planned for later this year will be out of an airport that does not have the NOS...SNA here I come. I will be sending letters along with receipts to the SAN airport authority, county commission and city council with an explanation as to why. I'm going to attempt to be a one man crusade to let the city know they are losing money because they allow this unconstitutional charade to take place in our city. I don't know if it will have an impact. But who knows, maybe I will be the one squeaky wheel that gets some attention. |
ETD machines can be programmed to detect just about anything, not just explosives. Here are some of the things that they can be programmed for that have an application useful to the TSA.
RDX (cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine) PETN (Pentaerythritol tetranitrate) TATP (triacetone triperoxide) HMTD (Hexamethylene triperoxide diamine) SEMTEX (Contains for RDX and PETN) NITRO (nitroglycerine) TNT (Trinitrotoluene) HMX (cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine) The ETD systems are designed to detect trace elements that are contained in explosives using (most commonly) Ion mobility spectrometry, electron capture detection, electrochemistry, and olfaction . If one looks on the component listing of the various products they buy for personal use you may indeed find some of these base chemicals listed, which is why the ETD’s may occasionally alarm on your hand lotion or whatever. These are not “false positives” but actual detection of the chemicals they were designed to detect. ETD machines cannot perform a complete chemical breakdown of the samples provided, they are just not designed to do that. They can only tell us when they detect what they are programmed to detect. TSO’s are not chemists and anyone who expects us to be has some serious problems with reality. If an alarm happens they we need to find out why, it’s as simple as that. That means a search, since lie detectors are somewhat unreliable. TSA is currently testing several different types of ETD based systems such as FIDO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fido_Explosives_Detector), the SABRE 2000, plus other technologies like the BLS (Bottle Liquid Scanner), SSD (Shoe Scanning Device), and many more.
Originally Posted by fishferbrains
(Post 16212675)
Let's turn this around for a moment:
Has there EVER been a documented case where the TSA has detected explosives in passenger luggage? You would think the TSA would make a big deal about this. Have they? |
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16213787)
ETD machines can be programmed to detect just about anything, not just explosives. Here are some of the things that they can be programmed for that have an application useful to the TSA.
RDX (cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine) PETN (Pentaerythritol tetranitrate) TATP (triacetone triperoxide) HMTD (Hexamethylene triperoxide diamine) SEMTEX (Contains for RDX and PETN) NITRO (nitroglycerine) TNT (Trinitrotoluene) HMX (cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine) The ETD systems are designed to detect trace elements that are contained in explosives using (most commonly) Ion mobility spectrometry, electron capture detection, electrochemistry, and olfaction . If one looks on the component listing of the various products they buy for personal use you may indeed find some of these base chemicals listed, which is why the ETD’s may occasionally alarm on your hand lotion or whatever. These are not “false positives” but actual detection of the chemicals they were designed to detect. ETD machines cannot perform a complete chemical breakdown of the samples provided, they are just not designed to do that. They can only tell us when they detect what they are programmed to detect. TSO’s are not chemists and anyone who expects us to be has some serious problems with reality. If an alarm happens they we need to find out why, it’s as simple as that. That means a search, since lie detectors are somewhat unreliable. TSA is currently testing several different types of ETD based systems such as FIDO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fido_Explosives_Detector), the SABRE 2000, plus other technologies like the BLS (Bottle Liquid Scanner), SSD (Shoe Scanning Device), and many more. Yes, its not really all that uncommon. Explosives are used not just by terrorists and the military but by quite a few different commercial concerns and police agencies. Hence the reason we dont make a big deal out of it, its about like finding a 1955 penny in a bucket full of pennies. |
Originally Posted by FriendlySkies
(Post 16213822)
Did you cite all of your sources for that info you posted?
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16213787)
Yes, its not really all that uncommon. Explosives are used not just by terrorists and the military but by quite a few different commercial concerns and police agencies. Hence the reason we dont make a big deal out of it, its about like finding a 1955 penny in a bucket full of pennies. |
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16213787)
ETD machines can be programmed to detect just about anything, not just explosives. Here are some of the things that they can be programmed for that have an application useful to the TSA.
RDX (cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine) PETN (Pentaerythritol tetranitrate) TATP (triacetone triperoxide) HMTD (Hexamethylene triperoxide diamine) SEMTEX (Contains for RDX and PETN) NITRO (nitroglycerine) TNT (Trinitrotoluene) HMX (cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine) The ETD systems are designed to detect trace elements that are contained in explosives using (most commonly) Ion mobility spectrometry, electron capture detection, electrochemistry, and olfaction . If one looks on the component listing of the various products they buy for personal use you may indeed find some of these base chemicals listed, which is why the ETD’s may occasionally alarm on your hand lotion or whatever. These are not “false positives” but actual detection of the chemicals they were designed to detect. ETD machines cannot perform a complete chemical breakdown of the samples provided, they are just not designed to do that. They can only tell us when they detect what they are programmed to detect. TSO’s are not chemists and anyone who expects us to be has some serious problems with reality. If an alarm happens they we need to find out why, it’s as simple as that. That means a search, since lie detectors are somewhat unreliable. TSA is currently testing several different types of ETD based systems such as FIDO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fido_Explosives_Detector), the SABRE 2000, plus other technologies like the BLS (Bottle Liquid Scanner), SSD (Shoe Scanning Device), and many more. Yes, its not really all that uncommon. Explosives are used not just by terrorists and the military but by quite a few different commercial concerns and police agencies. Hence the reason we dont make a big deal out of it, its about like finding a 1955 penny in a bucket full of pennies. I have a solution. It's called DESIGN A MACHINE THAT CAN DETECT THE ENTIRE COMPOUND. And yes it can be done. But companies are being asked to instead design machines that look up our butts and try to find a person who is sweating cause they MIGHT be a te****ist. And trust me...nobody will mistake TSA smurfs for chemists. Garbage men maybe. Pedophiles probably. But no, not chemists. |
Originally Posted by phoebepontiac
(Post 16213869)
But some people report getting an extra intrusive back room custody frisk as a result of a positive swab. I'd call that a big deal. And what about the guy who got his shoes confiscated? And the person whose hair conditioner caused, what was it, two hours of freaking out over everything in her bag, with multiple TSA folks and LEO's involved? These are anecdotes, yes, but there are enough of them to call your "not a big deal" into question.
Originally Posted by TXagogo
(Post 16213928)
I have a solution. It's called DESIGN A MACHINE THAT CAN DETECT THE ENTIRE COMPOUND.
Originally Posted by TXagogo
(Post 16213928)
And yes it can be done. But companies are being asked to instead design machines that look up our butts and try to find a person who is sweating cause they MIGHT be a te****ist.
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16213787)
ETD machines can be programmed to detect just about anything, not just explosives. Here are some of the things that they can be programmed for that have an application useful to the TSA.
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16213787)
ETD machines can be programmed to detect just about anything, not just explosives. Here are some of the things that they can be programmed for that have an application useful to the TSA.
RDX (cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine) PETN (Pentaerythritol tetranitrate) TATP (triacetone triperoxide) HMTD (Hexamethylene triperoxide diamine) SEMTEX (Contains for RDX and PETN) NITRO (nitroglycerine) TNT (Trinitrotoluene) HMX (cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine) The ETD systems are designed to detect trace elements that are contained in explosives using (most commonly) Ion mobility spectrometry, electron capture detection, electrochemistry, and olfaction . If one looks on the component listing of the various products they buy for personal use you may indeed find some of these base chemicals listed, which is why the ETD’s may occasionally alarm on your hand lotion or whatever. These are not “false positives” but actual detection of the chemicals they were designed to detect. ETD machines cannot perform a complete chemical breakdown of the samples provided, they are just not designed to do that. They can only tell us when they detect what they are programmed to detect. TSO’s are not chemists and anyone who expects us to be has some serious problems with reality. If an alarm happens they we need to find out why, it’s as simple as that. That means a search, since lie detectors are somewhat unreliable. TSA is currently testing several different types of ETD based systems such as FIDO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fido_Explosives_Detector), the SABRE 2000, plus other technologies like the BLS (Bottle Liquid Scanner), SSD (Shoe Scanning Device), and many more. Yes, its not really all that uncommon. Explosives are used not just by terrorists and the military but by quite a few different commercial concerns and police agencies. Hence the reason we dont make a big deal out of it, its about like finding a 1955 penny in a bucket full of pennies. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:10 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.