Terrorists - Pick a Rainy Day!
Oct 17, 2011, 8:15 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Terrorists - Pick a Rainy Day!
It's been raining here the last 3 days, and I noticed that the MMW NOS's at MIA were going crazy over wet clothing. Saw blotches all over the result monitor. The monitor looked like a checkerboard.
After 30-40 botched scans, they shut down the MMW and directed everyone through the WTMD's. Checkpoint G, Sunday.
Anyone else seen similar "anomalies"?
When a large number of passengers are very wet, the MMW IS NFG.
After 30-40 botched scans, they shut down the MMW and directed everyone through the WTMD's. Checkpoint G, Sunday.
Anyone else seen similar "anomalies"?
When a large number of passengers are very wet, the MMW IS NFG.
Oct 17, 2011, 8:36 pm
#2
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston
Programs: CO Platinum
Posts: 283
You just figured out a new use for that bottle of water that you're carrying into the security line. Just open it up and pour the contents over your clothes. Not a banned activity! What a new and easy way to defeat the NoS. 
Oct 17, 2011, 8:50 pm
#3
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
Oct 17, 2011, 8:50 pm
#4
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Note to self: Make sure to wear wet clothing when flying if the NoS ever becomes mandatory 
Oct 17, 2011, 8:57 pm
#5
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,580
Maybe I'm missing something, but how did you get to see the monitor? I thought the monitor is viewed by a separate person in a closed room.
Oct 17, 2011, 9:09 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Everyone can see it from the secure side.
Next time it rains like he₤₤ again, I'll bring my camera.
Oct 17, 2011, 11:33 pm
#8
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SFO/SJC/SQL
Posts: 1,412
Oct 18, 2011, 11:43 am
#10
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Oct 18, 2011, 12:03 pm
#11
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Miami, Fl, sometimes
Programs: AAEXP, MRPLT
Posts: 126
Mentioned this in another thread.
While observing the pattern at a MMW queue the other day, two gentlemen had their underarms flagged. Neither were patted in those areas.
While observing the pattern at a MMW queue the other day, two gentlemen had their underarms flagged. Neither were patted in those areas.
Last edited by boatseller; Oct 18, 2011 at 4:14 pm
Oct 18, 2011, 4:26 pm
#12
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
As just one example, tell those passengers who I have met who have various medical replacements and/or pace makers, and have DEMANDED to be screened by AIT - and who clear WITHOUT being patted down at all, you tell them AIT is "inefficient". I am pretty sure they believe the system is actually very efficient.
As far as flaws - all system will have flaws, and again, its based on how you chose to look at it. When the BAOs provide training and walk through the WTMD WITHOUT alarm, and we KNOW they have something on them, yet no alarm, and they later show us the fully assembled IED on their body, is that efficient? Its certainly a flaw or limit with the WTMD - so if we can point out flaws with WTMD, is it silly to use them to screen people?
If you concern is about time or false alarms, is that all security should be concerned with? Are you suggesting there is and should be no trade off? As an added note I was recently screened by AIT with ATR, and it was MUCH faster than normal AIT - and I saw only 1 person patted down in my lane (and I knew that person would be patted down as they walked in the AIT because of what they left on their body. TSO asked them to remove the item, but the passenger didn't want to).
And I could go on about how the WTMD has inefficiencies, and where the AIT surpasses such out-dated technology...
So I'm a bit confused, what kind of "inefficient" are you talking about?
Oct 18, 2011, 4:51 pm
#13
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 19
[QUOTE=SATTSO;17296217........ and I saw only 1 person patted down in my lane (and I knew that person would be patted down as they walked in the AIT because of what they left on their body. TSO asked them to remove the item, but the passenger didn't want to).
[/QUOTE]
Was it their prosthetic breast that they did not want to remove ?
[/QUOTE]
Was it their prosthetic breast that they did not want to remove ?
Oct 18, 2011, 5:18 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 16,044
,
Based on your evidence, yes.
Well, if the TSO knew what caused the alarm and still did the pat down, that is inefficient.
Oct 18, 2011, 6:19 pm
#15
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 516
Inefficient? An interesting word; a vague word, one that can change based on a particular point of view.
As just one example, tell those passengers who I have met who have various medical replacements and/or pace makers, and have DEMANDED to be screened by AIT - and who clear WITHOUT being patted down at all, you tell them AIT is "inefficient". I am pretty sure they believe the system is actually very efficient.
As far as flaws - all system will have flaws, and again, its based on how you chose to look at it. When the BAOs provide training and walk through the WTMD WITHOUT alarm, and we KNOW they have something on them, yet no alarm, and they later show us the fully assembled IED on their body, is that efficient? Its certainly a flaw or limit with the WTMD - so if we can point out flaws with WTMD, is it silly to use them to screen people?
If you concern is about time or false alarms, is that all security should be concerned with? Are you suggesting there is and should be no trade off? As an added note I was recently screened by AIT with ATR, and it was MUCH faster than normal AIT - and I saw only 1 person patted down in my lane (and I knew that person would be patted down as they walked in the AIT because of what they left on their body. TSO asked them to remove the item, but the passenger didn't want to).
And I could go on about how the WTMD has inefficiencies, and where the AIT surpasses such out-dated technology...
So I'm a bit confused, what kind of "inefficient" are you talking about?
As just one example, tell those passengers who I have met who have various medical replacements and/or pace makers, and have DEMANDED to be screened by AIT - and who clear WITHOUT being patted down at all, you tell them AIT is "inefficient". I am pretty sure they believe the system is actually very efficient.
As far as flaws - all system will have flaws, and again, its based on how you chose to look at it. When the BAOs provide training and walk through the WTMD WITHOUT alarm, and we KNOW they have something on them, yet no alarm, and they later show us the fully assembled IED on their body, is that efficient? Its certainly a flaw or limit with the WTMD - so if we can point out flaws with WTMD, is it silly to use them to screen people?
If you concern is about time or false alarms, is that all security should be concerned with? Are you suggesting there is and should be no trade off? As an added note I was recently screened by AIT with ATR, and it was MUCH faster than normal AIT - and I saw only 1 person patted down in my lane (and I knew that person would be patted down as they walked in the AIT because of what they left on their body. TSO asked them to remove the item, but the passenger didn't want to).
And I could go on about how the WTMD has inefficiencies, and where the AIT surpasses such out-dated technology...
So I'm a bit confused, what kind of "inefficient" are you talking about?
My take is that the AIT is inefficient; the unit of work per passenger cleared is higher than with the WTMD. For many purposes, it is also ineffective (although you do a good job of pointing out some corner cases where it has advantages).