Today's MMW ATR Observations
Dec 26, 2011, 3:22 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SJC
Programs: AA, AS, Marriott
Posts: 6,066
Today's MMW ATR Observations
I know there was another thread/post on this somewhere, but a few searches yielded no results.
I had a long layover today at DFW, and I was observing the MMW machines with ATR at one of the Terminal D checkpoints. Perhaps my sample sample is too small, but I watched about 30 women and 10 men all be subjected to the MMW. Not a single person opted out. Since my home airport has BXSX and I haven't flown much since the ATR software was deployed throughout, I wanted to see the software in action and get some numbers on the false positive rate.
The only people allowed through the WTMD were airport workers, one man with his young daughter and a woman with a dog. Also of note was that the female TSO on the receiving end of the MMW machine stopped to pet the dog as the woman went through. At first I thought she was doing and ETD swab of the dog, but she resumed her NoS observation duties without changing her gloves.
It was at this point I started to watch the people going through the MMW with ATR. Of the 30 women, over 80% - I counted - got the yellow boxes with the gumby figure. This same female TSO, whose gloves had touched the dog, would then proceed to conduct the resolution patdown on the areas with the yellow boxes. Not once did she change her gloves.
There weren't as many male passengers going through this checkpoint at the time, so I could only see a limited number. Of those I did see go through, 40% (4 out of 10) were selected for a resolution patdown. One was wearing a watch and escaped the patdown when he pointed to it. Another had his wallet in a pocket and was given the most cursory of resolutions patdowns. The other two men were false positives for no apparent reason.
The targeted areas for resolution patdowns were the upper body, especially the arms and back. I've given up on people opting out. Most people don't know it's an option, and, even if they did, they "prefer to use the scanner to getting a patdown." Surprise! Not one person protested the resolution patdowns, but a few seemed shocked to receive one. Nobody requested new gloves. I wouldn't want to have been the 25th woman who needed a resolution patdown. I felt like going up to the woman and saying, "Did you know those gloves had touched 24 other people and some dog?" Now, I like dogs as much as the next person, but there are those who are severely allergic.
After awhile, the male and female assist disappeared, and the rope went up block the MMW entrance. At this point, everyone was ushered through the WTMD. No patdowns of any kind were given for those who did not alarm the WTMD.
I had a long layover today at DFW, and I was observing the MMW machines with ATR at one of the Terminal D checkpoints. Perhaps my sample sample is too small, but I watched about 30 women and 10 men all be subjected to the MMW. Not a single person opted out. Since my home airport has BXSX and I haven't flown much since the ATR software was deployed throughout, I wanted to see the software in action and get some numbers on the false positive rate.
The only people allowed through the WTMD were airport workers, one man with his young daughter and a woman with a dog. Also of note was that the female TSO on the receiving end of the MMW machine stopped to pet the dog as the woman went through. At first I thought she was doing and ETD swab of the dog, but she resumed her NoS observation duties without changing her gloves.
It was at this point I started to watch the people going through the MMW with ATR. Of the 30 women, over 80% - I counted - got the yellow boxes with the gumby figure. This same female TSO, whose gloves had touched the dog, would then proceed to conduct the resolution patdown on the areas with the yellow boxes. Not once did she change her gloves.
There weren't as many male passengers going through this checkpoint at the time, so I could only see a limited number. Of those I did see go through, 40% (4 out of 10) were selected for a resolution patdown. One was wearing a watch and escaped the patdown when he pointed to it. Another had his wallet in a pocket and was given the most cursory of resolutions patdowns. The other two men were false positives for no apparent reason.
The targeted areas for resolution patdowns were the upper body, especially the arms and back. I've given up on people opting out. Most people don't know it's an option, and, even if they did, they "prefer to use the scanner to getting a patdown." Surprise! Not one person protested the resolution patdowns, but a few seemed shocked to receive one. Nobody requested new gloves. I wouldn't want to have been the 25th woman who needed a resolution patdown. I felt like going up to the woman and saying, "Did you know those gloves had touched 24 other people and some dog?" Now, I like dogs as much as the next person, but there are those who are severely allergic.
After awhile, the male and female assist disappeared, and the rope went up block the MMW entrance. At this point, everyone was ushered through the WTMD. No patdowns of any kind were given for those who did not alarm the WTMD.
Dec 26, 2011, 3:36 pm
#2
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
I wonder why they would ever shut down the MMW with ATD. It would seem to require no additional manpower. With no goon in the backroom, why would it need a break?
Seems like any clerk can deal with ATD.
Any ideas?
Seems like any clerk can deal with ATD.
Any ideas?
Dec 26, 2011, 3:38 pm
#3
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: in the sky
Posts: 490
uhm...
dude/dudette?
you just posted on the other thread >1/2 hour ago... it's just a couple of threads down on page one
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/check...l#post17694458 (sorry, don't know how to link other than pasting url)
but thanks for the observations! ^
you just posted on the other thread >1/2 hour ago... it's just a couple of threads down on page one
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/check...l#post17694458 (sorry, don't know how to link other than pasting url)
but thanks for the observations! ^
Dec 26, 2011, 3:47 pm
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SJC
Programs: AA, AS, Marriott
Posts: 6,066
I'm aware of my post in the other thread. Although, that thread is turning into more of a philosophical debate along the lines of "I now see MMW+ATR as an acceptable level of what I'll tolerate, so I won't opt-out."
My post in this thread was my observations of the very high false positive rate of MMW+ATR.
My post in this thread was my observations of the very high false positive rate of MMW+ATR.
Dec 26, 2011, 4:17 pm
#5
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: in the sky
Posts: 490
I'm aware of my post in the other thread. Although, that thread is turning into more of a philosophical debate along the lines of "I now see MMW+ATR as an acceptable level of what I'll tolerate, so I won't opt-out."
My post in this thread was my observations of the very high false positive rate of MMW+ATR.
My post in this thread was my observations of the very high false positive rate of MMW+ATR.
I suspect many will find ATR/MMW acceptable on face value at least until false positive rates upset that apple-cart. How nice to see TSA tasked with the sisyphusian task of pushing that rock back up the avalanching slope of public opinion.
Roll on.
Dec 26, 2011, 4:22 pm
#6
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: in the sky
Posts: 490
Very funny Wimpie! I guess the male and female assists needed a break from clearing all the false alarms and the entire team needed a break from the tedious work of clearing all passengers through the checkpoint using such faulty technology???
Dec 26, 2011, 4:31 pm
#7
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 175
Dec 26, 2011, 5:41 pm
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SJC
Programs: AA, AS, Marriott
Posts: 6,066
While one can never be too paranoid, I will take the TSA at face value on this one. The TSOs didn't have the radio headsets, and I think if there were a ghost in the machine that that person would override the false positives to warm people up to the idea of the MMW.
Dec 26, 2011, 6:26 pm
#9
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Why would they EVER shut down the MMW/ATD?
The NOS should be 24/7 as TSA says it's primary.
They need M-F gropers at the WTMD, and M-F gropers at the NOS.
What's the difference?
With their (warped) priorities, only overflow should go to WTMD.
@:-)Must be their unpredictable BS@:-)
Dec 26, 2011, 6:42 pm
#10
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
I know there was another thread/post on this somewhere, but a few searches yielded no results.
I had a long layover today at DFW, and I was observing the MMW machines with ATR at one of the Terminal D checkpoints. Perhaps my sample sample is too small, but I watched about 30 women and 10 men all be subjected to the MMW. Not a single person opted out. Since my home airport has BXSX and I haven't flown much since the ATR software was deployed throughout, I wanted to see the software in action and get some numbers on the false positive rate.
The only people allowed through the WTMD were airport workers, one man with his young daughter and a woman with a dog. Also of note was that the female TSO on the receiving end of the MMW machine stopped to pet the dog as the woman went through. At first I thought she was doing and ETD swab of the dog, but she resumed her NoS observation duties without changing her gloves.
It was at this point I started to watch the people going through the MMW with ATR. Of the 30 women, over 80% - I counted - got the yellow boxes with the gumby figure. This same female TSO, whose gloves had touched the dog, would then proceed to conduct the resolution patdown on the areas with the yellow boxes. Not once did she change her gloves.
There weren't as many male passengers going through this checkpoint at the time, so I could only see a limited number. Of those I did see go through, 40% (4 out of 10) were selected for a resolution patdown. One was wearing a watch and escaped the patdown when he pointed to it. Another had his wallet in a pocket and was given the most cursory of resolutions patdowns. The other two men were false positives for no apparent reason.
The targeted areas for resolution patdowns were the upper body, especially the arms and back. I've given up on people opting out. Most people don't know it's an option, and, even if they did, they "prefer to use the scanner to getting a patdown." Surprise! Not one person protested the resolution patdowns, but a few seemed shocked to receive one. Nobody requested new gloves. I wouldn't want to have been the 25th woman who needed a resolution patdown. I felt like going up to the woman and saying, "Did you know those gloves had touched 24 other people and some dog?" Now, I like dogs as much as the next person, but there are those who are severely allergic.
After awhile, the male and female assist disappeared, and the rope went up block the MMW entrance. At this point, everyone was ushered through the WTMD. No patdowns of any kind were given for those who did not alarm the WTMD.
I had a long layover today at DFW, and I was observing the MMW machines with ATR at one of the Terminal D checkpoints. Perhaps my sample sample is too small, but I watched about 30 women and 10 men all be subjected to the MMW. Not a single person opted out. Since my home airport has BXSX and I haven't flown much since the ATR software was deployed throughout, I wanted to see the software in action and get some numbers on the false positive rate.
The only people allowed through the WTMD were airport workers, one man with his young daughter and a woman with a dog. Also of note was that the female TSO on the receiving end of the MMW machine stopped to pet the dog as the woman went through. At first I thought she was doing and ETD swab of the dog, but she resumed her NoS observation duties without changing her gloves.
It was at this point I started to watch the people going through the MMW with ATR. Of the 30 women, over 80% - I counted - got the yellow boxes with the gumby figure. This same female TSO, whose gloves had touched the dog, would then proceed to conduct the resolution patdown on the areas with the yellow boxes. Not once did she change her gloves.
There weren't as many male passengers going through this checkpoint at the time, so I could only see a limited number. Of those I did see go through, 40% (4 out of 10) were selected for a resolution patdown. One was wearing a watch and escaped the patdown when he pointed to it. Another had his wallet in a pocket and was given the most cursory of resolutions patdowns. The other two men were false positives for no apparent reason.
The targeted areas for resolution patdowns were the upper body, especially the arms and back. I've given up on people opting out. Most people don't know it's an option, and, even if they did, they "prefer to use the scanner to getting a patdown." Surprise! Not one person protested the resolution patdowns, but a few seemed shocked to receive one. Nobody requested new gloves. I wouldn't want to have been the 25th woman who needed a resolution patdown. I felt like going up to the woman and saying, "Did you know those gloves had touched 24 other people and some dog?" Now, I like dogs as much as the next person, but there are those who are severely allergic.
After awhile, the male and female assist disappeared, and the rope went up block the MMW entrance. At this point, everyone was ushered through the WTMD. No patdowns of any kind were given for those who did not alarm the WTMD.
Dec 26, 2011, 7:00 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
Weren't the TSA rub downs after the Strip Search Machine used to resolve an anomaly?
TSA's term for the various pat downs is not known to the public so using plain simple english to describe what was observed is accurate.
TSA's term for the various pat downs is not known to the public so using plain simple english to describe what was observed is accurate.
Dec 26, 2011, 7:48 pm
#12
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
(The term "enhanced pat down" appears to be a press invention. A year ago, the TSA said it "enhanced the pat downs" and the media started calling them "enhanced pat downs", but we've been told here numerous times that nothing by that name exists.)
Dec 26, 2011, 8:45 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
It's only "not known to the public" if you want to say that everything posted here by TSO's is a lie! It's been said many times that there are only two patdowns: the Standard (SPD) and the Resolution (RPD). The former is the one normally used. The latter is done only in a private room and only by a STSO. The exact conditions on when it's done appear to be SSI, but putting things together it appears to be multiple things such as a positive ETD plus something else. What's done after an AIT anomaly is a subset of the SPD over the area in question (although from what I can see, it's usually a very sloppy version of it).
(The term "enhanced pat down" appears to be a press invention. A year ago, the TSA said it "enhanced the pat downs" and the media started calling them "enhanced pat downs", but we've been told here numerous times that nothing by that name exists.)
(The term "enhanced pat down" appears to be a press invention. A year ago, the TSA said it "enhanced the pat downs" and the media started calling them "enhanced pat downs", but we've been told here numerous times that nothing by that name exists.)
What is posted here has little to do with what people at airports know.
Dec 26, 2011, 8:49 pm
#14
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the path to perdition
Programs: Delta, United
Posts: 4,786
Dec 26, 2011, 9:12 pm
#15
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
Programs: AA lifetime Gold , DL Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 572
My wife and I have gone through the MMW quite a few times so far and we never had any patdowns, both with the old nude images and the new software.
Our trick, we empty our pockets of everything and we do not wear heavy bulky clothing.
Mr. Elliott
Our trick, we empty our pockets of everything and we do not wear heavy bulky clothing.
Mr. Elliott