Spiff

ETD was in use pre-TSA infestation of our airports.

garydpdx

If we were still living in a pre-9/11 world, I would agree with many that air security would be more stringent but not at the level that we have now. The economic cycles would have been less severe on the downside - shallower slumps, a lesser Great Recession (its causes lay elsewhere) and probably a full recovery by now. In 2005, I read in the FT that increased security costs the US economy a penalty of $1 billion per day; since the real Great Recession officially ended in mid-2009, that's over $1.25 trillion that could have made the the last four years a whole lot better, not just flying ...

boss315

If only we could go to pre 9/11.......guess that's like hoping Ward June and the Beav move in next door!

Ocn Vw 1K

As this is overall about airport/airline security, please follow the thread to the appropriate travel security forum. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, TravelBuzz.

Darkumbra

spiff did say "AS A PASSENGER"

Himeno

Not to mention that the people the UK government claimed were planning these liquid bombs never even attempted to build a prototype of such a device.

The only good thing that came out of 9/11 in terms of security was the cockpit doors.

While I don't like some of the things Australia has done with airport security, the idea is a good one.
Airports responsible for airport security using contracted security companies.
Department of Infrastructure and Transport provides guidelines of minimum screening requirements.

catocony

Osama bin Laden won. He's dead, but his two-bit attack was more successful than he ever dreamed. The US has been eating itself alive for almost 12 years, with no end in sight. Trillions of dollars down the drain, thousands of lives lost, 10s of thousands of lives destroyed. All for the cost of 20 plane tickets, some hours at flight school, and a trip to Home Depot to pick up box cutters.

No wild plan. No C4, no explosives. No machine guns smuggled on board. No freaking dolphins with freaking lasers on their freaking heads with Blofeld stroking his cat while sitting in his chair. A very simple, cheap attack that Americans seem unable to accept for what it truly was, reflect, and move on with life. Was panic acceptable in the days after the attack? Sure. Kneejerk reactions? Sure. 12 years later? No.

InkUnderNails

I remember that right after 9/11 we were collectively waiting for the other shoe to drop, that next attack. It has been twelve long years with 12 years of intervening knowledge and observation. Yet, we still wait for the other shoe to drop.

FliesWay2Much

We can assume that civil aviation security would be under the authority of the FAA. Screening would have remained at appropriate levels. There would be no DHS. FEMA and the U.S. Coast Guard would have not been decimated by the DHS and their primary missions would not have been negatively impacted.

In a way, I think the TSA and its draconian screening procedures may have helped soften the blow to the airlines of the bottom dropping out of the economy back in 2008. A sizeable percentage of frequent flyers either greatly reduced their trips or flat out stopped flying. So, there had been a steady reduction in revenue, which made the step function in 2008 less of a step function.

I suspect the national security community would have acknowledged increased threats from bombs and explosives and there would have been a gradual increase in airport screening for explosives.

Remember that the FAA did a study on NOSs back in 1999. The report stated that the biggest hurdle to overcome was public acceptance. We may very well have had Cancer Boxes regardless of 9/11. However, one could assume that metal detectors would have been the primary screening tools.

Since there would be no TSA, other forms of transportation would be safe. But, perhaps local cops might have tried random bag checks anyway.

Information Technology would have advanced at the same pace, so, I suspect a lot of the surveillance state would have happened anyway.

I know one thing for certain: I would be still flying commercially.

Himeno

One shoe was used to kick NY/DC. The other shoe was thrown at the US's face. They have no more shoes.

yandosan

Take a trip on Japan Air or Bangkok Air.
They still treat you like a king.
"Service" is still on their agenda.
That's what it would be like without the 9/11 Fear/Paranoia Industry
that has crept into our airports and our lives.

WillCAD

Oh, sure, I know, but what I meant was that we wouldn't have to stand around while some government actor swabbed every single item from our carry-ons with deliberate, spiteful, madding slowness, just to delay us and make us miss a connection.

Boggie Dog

Did it work any better then than it does now?

TSA's ETD machines have a 100% false positive rate. Not very useful for screening purposes.

Spiff

That statement makes zero sense. Please let us know when you'd care to join the discussion.

studentff

I'll take a stab at this example, which seems not to have been discussed much.

The self-serve/kiosk revolution would still have happened; the airlines were thrilled to cut costs by getting rid of checkin agents. Once home-printed / mobile BPs got started, I think the airline would have moved their revenue-protection ID check (done under the guise of security) to the gate. Once that became cumbersome, they might have started having you scan your photo ID or credit card as a form of ID authentication in addition to scanning your BP.

I don't think the BSX NoS would have ever seen an airport without the arrogance that is DHS/TSA. The idea of subjecting people to ionizing radiation with no benefit to the individual would not have any support from anyone. I think MMW NoS might have been introduced in some places as an alternative to pat-down/HHMD for secondary screening and as an alternative for people with medical implants who cannot use or alarm the WTMD.

Yup. A lot of the surveillance-state stuff was waiting in the wings for an excuse to get started. A civil-liberties flap in the late 90s was increasing "know your customer" requirements for banks, which meant increased reporting of allegedly suspicious activities/people. 9/11 became the excuse to shove a lot of it into the Patriot Act, but some other excuse would have been found.