Concern about increased airport security in Australia
Aug 3, 2011, 2:49 am
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,217
Well we can thank heavens for small mercies that it is MMW and not BKSX. However as a security measure it is worthless, since they've already announced it will only operate during business hours Monday to Friday!
Aug 3, 2011, 5:33 am
#32
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SJC
Programs: AA, AS, Marriott
Posts: 6,068
I noticed on the fact sheet they have a pink (female) and blue (male) button with the word Scan. What about individuals currently in transition before sex reassignment surgery? Something is likely to alarm, and it is not clear who would perform a "frisk search", as Australia calls it.
Second, how well does ATR detect colostomy and other types of medical bags? I know that these almost always "alarm" in the US, and the TSOs make a big deal out of it every single time. I imagine ATR would be even worse about this. The impact assessment says that it's recommended prosthetic devices be placed in checked luggage. Yeah... that makes sense.
Finally, it indicates travelers under the age of 18 will be required to give consent yet they will not be able to choose alternative screening if selected? Is this a typo? Is it because refusing the NoS leads to a full patdown? What happens to these same individuals when they erroneously alarm the NoS?
I hope Australia makes the same conclusion as Italy and Germany and doesn't go the way of the US.
Second, how well does ATR detect colostomy and other types of medical bags? I know that these almost always "alarm" in the US, and the TSOs make a big deal out of it every single time. I imagine ATR would be even worse about this. The impact assessment says that it's recommended prosthetic devices be placed in checked luggage. Yeah... that makes sense.
Finally, it indicates travelers under the age of 18 will be required to give consent yet they will not be able to choose alternative screening if selected? Is this a typo? Is it because refusing the NoS leads to a full patdown? What happens to these same individuals when they erroneously alarm the NoS?
I hope Australia makes the same conclusion as Italy and Germany and doesn't go the way of the US.
Aug 3, 2011, 6:04 am
#33
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
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
Neil
No reason to check ID for revenue reasons in such an environment.
Aug 12, 2011, 12:53 pm
#34
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 580
I find this updated article really scary. It looks like the addition of body scanners may increase wait time in Australian airports, as well as the expense of travel in Australia.
Also, it looks like there are plans to bring about body scanners in domestic terminals instead of only international terminals.
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-...810-1imab.html
Also, it looks like there are plans to bring about body scanners in domestic terminals instead of only international terminals.
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-...810-1imab.html
Aug 12, 2011, 1:09 pm
#35
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: in the sky
Posts: 490
There are some androgynous people in this world.
Aug 12, 2011, 5:01 pm
#36
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: QFF
Posts: 5,304
Has anyone sent a 'feedback' letter to the trail comments email? or any drafts of such a letter we could send? (i'm not the best at writing letters... :/)
Why are there no news stories on this topic that allow commenting? @_@
Why are there no news stories on this topic that allow commenting? @_@
Aug 14, 2011, 6:02 am
#38
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: MEL
Programs: VA Gold, Aegean *G, QF, SQ...etc
Posts: 176
That same article ran in Saturday's Age traveller supplement as 'See Through Safety'. I've sent the following letter to the editor:
Saturday's Traveller describes a new trial of advanced imaging technology in Australia as 'See through safety'. This headline is entirely inaccurate: while the technology is capable of seeing through clothes, it demonstrably does not improve flying safety (even the TSA have admitted it would not have picked up the undie-bombers payload, and the article in The Age highlighted how error-prone they are), and it is a profound risk to the safety of a number of already-marginalised passenger groups.
The machines have not been proven physically safe: non-government scientists and medical practitioners have raised concerns about them in the US. Moreover, in the US those with ostomies, breast cancer survivors, and children have been singled out for humiliating secondary screening. The imaging process itself is deeply difficult for some sexual assault survivors, and breaches the medical privacy of many groups including the aforementioned ostomates and breast cancer survivors, as well as transgender and intersex individuals.
I sincerely hope the Australian government will see sense and choose not to install these invasive machines until (at the very least) they are proven safe, and my preference would be to never see them here. I also fervently hope that the cost will not be passed on to passengers, many of whom will be harmed by this technology (even if it is just by longer security lines), and who are vanishingly unlikely to benefit from it.
I asked them to withhold my name, since I don't really want to find myself on a watchlist :/
Saturday's Traveller describes a new trial of advanced imaging technology in Australia as 'See through safety'. This headline is entirely inaccurate: while the technology is capable of seeing through clothes, it demonstrably does not improve flying safety (even the TSA have admitted it would not have picked up the undie-bombers payload, and the article in The Age highlighted how error-prone they are), and it is a profound risk to the safety of a number of already-marginalised passenger groups.
The machines have not been proven physically safe: non-government scientists and medical practitioners have raised concerns about them in the US. Moreover, in the US those with ostomies, breast cancer survivors, and children have been singled out for humiliating secondary screening. The imaging process itself is deeply difficult for some sexual assault survivors, and breaches the medical privacy of many groups including the aforementioned ostomates and breast cancer survivors, as well as transgender and intersex individuals.
I sincerely hope the Australian government will see sense and choose not to install these invasive machines until (at the very least) they are proven safe, and my preference would be to never see them here. I also fervently hope that the cost will not be passed on to passengers, many of whom will be harmed by this technology (even if it is just by longer security lines), and who are vanishingly unlikely to benefit from it.
I asked them to withhold my name, since I don't really want to find myself on a watchlist :/
Nov 1, 2011, 9:26 pm
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,217
I've just gone through security at MEL T2 and can advise that a small collection of MMW machines live at the extreme right of the checkpoint (which is the elite lane). They were all roped off. Notices invited "volunteers" to go through the scanners (as primary). The lines for the WTMDs were too short for me to determine whether people alarming them had the option of scanner rather than frisk.
No worries for now, but I expect a boiling frog approach will be taken to ramp up the amount of scans as primary search, and/or remove opt-outs.
No worries for now, but I expect a boiling frog approach will be taken to ramp up the amount of scans as primary search, and/or remove opt-outs.
Nov 2, 2011, 11:44 pm
#40
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,795
I've just gone through security at MEL T2 and can advise that a small collection of MMW machines live at the extreme right of the checkpoint (which is the elite lane). They were all roped off. Notices invited "volunteers" to go through the scanners (as primary). The lines for the WTMDs were too short for me to determine whether people alarming them had the option of scanner rather than frisk.
No worries for now, but I expect a boiling frog approach will be taken to ramp up the amount of scans as primary search, and/or remove opt-outs.
No worries for now, but I expect a boiling frog approach will be taken to ramp up the amount of scans as primary search, and/or remove opt-outs.
The trial in MEL was scheduled for 5 - 30 Sept, and in SYD 1-19 August. I've flown out of SYD (int'l terminal) twice since the trial period ended and didn't see any sign of them at all. (But it's a wide area, I was busy watching my stuff, and the line moves quickly enough that there's no time to stand and gawk.)
And I can't find anything on gov't or news websites with any update on plans for implementing the body scanners at Australian airports. Not saying it won't happen, just that there's no news.
Feb 4, 2012, 6:51 am
#42
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 821
Feb 4, 2012, 7:21 am
#43
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SEA/YVR/BLI
Programs: UA "Lifetime" Gold, AS MVPG100K, OW Emerald, HH Lifetime Diamond, IC Plat, Marriott Gold, Hertz Gold
Posts: 9,490
I can no longer tell the world about the common-sense Aussie approach to boarding a plane. 
It looks like our early-June post Oz-Fest #9 departure from SYD will be just under the wire.