Terminal dump at STN due to arriving international passengers mixing
 

There was a terminal dump yesterday at Stansted Airport after passengers arriving from LIS on Ryanair (believe it was FR1887) were routed through the wrong door and into the departures hall instead of arrivals. The UK being the only EU country which does not trust other EU countries' screening standards, it was determined that all passengers in the terminal had now had the opportunity to interact with "non-sterile" passengers and would need to be rescreened, causing delays of up to 2 hours.

An investigation is in progress as to who was responsible for the wrong door being opened.

Yet another reason not to transit nor O/D in the UK. :td:

Mindless idiocy. :mad:

The same would happen in literally any developed country.

Jeez Spiff, between US and UK policies, you're gonna blow a gasket! :D

But I agree with you... I avoid the UK when I can. Even places like Vietnam make transiting less painful.

I love arriving in the UK, it's so painless. Especially now with e-passport gates, you don't have to queue up, speak to anyone, anything. Scan your passport, grab your bags and go.

That's not relevant to transiting the UK. Nor is it even how it goes for most non-European citizens entering into the UK.

And you have examples from most OECD countries, especially most of the OECD countries where the domestic business of government is not conducted primarily in English? I certainly don't.

Syracuse, NY last year I believe. Granted, that's not a non-English speaking country. But I don't tend to follow minor local interest stories like that from any non-English speaking countries because they don't get translated and I know... half-decent Spanish at best and enough French/German to MAYBE know the basic point of what's going on.

So only examples from the US and UK? But I'm not sure that what you posted answers the question, no less so as Syracuse wasn't about screened international passengers mixing with screened departing passengers resulting in a terminal dump.

The TSA is the primary leader in driving up the number of terminal dumps reported, but have any of those TSA dumped stories been of this UK sort?

"Non-English" OECD countries' news stories about airports are easily and often translated. Rather systematically at that by the major wire services in the US.

I was referring to terminal dumps in general being something that'd happen anywhere. I've never heard of this exact situation, but it'd be worth asking has the situation leading to it ever happened before? It seems a very stupid mistake to make.

Am I saying it was a real threat? Of course not, a customs threat, sure, but not a security one. However, there are procedures in place for a reason and it makes sense.

I've only once been caught up in a terminal dump like this, it was at LTN and it was cause some idiot called in a bomb threat. My flight was delayed, and of course it was fake, but better safe than sorry...

No, it wouldn't. Any country with common sense would dismiss it as a one-off and let it go.

I disagree with you 100%. That's a stupid over-reaction with no corroborating evidence. It's not "better safe than sorry", it's a sorry-assed decision made by incompetent idiots to jump when morons on the telephone say "jump". I'd be livid if I was in a terminal that was dumped because some idiot dropped 50p in a phone box and ran his yob and then some imbecile in DfT listened. :mad:

So what's the lesson, that fakes making fake threats get their way because the government authorities play the part of surrender monkey and don't trust their own and their partner's "security" measures for a "secure" facility?

Terrorists can succeed easily at coercing government when too many fearful individuals buy into the notion of "better safe than (ever) sorry".

Risk management is sensible; risk elimination maybe not so much unless resources are unlimited -- à la an immortal goose that keeps laying golden eggs.

It's all completely stupid, but don't forget the TSA doesn't trust most other countries to do security screening either.

Do you really want that to be the bar? An agency that should wiped off the face of the planet with the stroke of a pen? ;)

Of course, ALL security procedures are baffling and ineffective, but I have always thought that the idea of getting screened at an airport I have just arrived in by air to be the absolute pinnacle of ridiculousness. Sorry, everyone, but it seems to be the norm worldwide, and not limited to Anglo countries or something.

What makes a security "expert" believe that someone might have smuggled a bomb or a weapon or a bottle of water or something on a flight TO LCY or AMS or FRA or Syracuse for that matter, but would not have used it because they had a plot to use it on the connecting flight instead? What would be the purpose in that? Mileage run before they get their 40 virgins?

Well, maybe one of your confederates gets a job at a tiny US airport, so that you can bring your water bottle past him. Then suppose JFK trusts all US airports, so you connect several times and eventually get into JFK airside. If LHR trusts JFK, then you will be able to drink your insecure bottled water on any flight in the EU.