All Food and Electronics Larger than Cellphones out for Screening
May 25, 17, 10:33 am
#91
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 24,551
Originally Posted by chollie
It's not clear yet, but I expect some TSOs will say 'food' includes medications and 'electronics' includes all medical devices - and anything with a battery, like a pocket flashlight.
If the full grope, with double genital rubs, that the 13-year-old boy got for forgetting to take his ipad out of his bag are the new norm, the lines are going to get pretty bad.
I know! Maybe we should give TSA millions of $$$ to hire more TSOs to do everything but work the checkpoints!
If the full grope, with double genital rubs, that the 13-year-old boy got for forgetting to take his ipad out of his bag are the new norm, the lines are going to get pretty bad.
I know! Maybe we should give TSA millions of $$$ to hire more TSOs to do everything but work the checkpoints!
I'll be flying out of FLL which is one of the airports mentioned in the current trial airports. I don't think I will take the glucose tester out of my carry on. Let them scream if they want.
May 25, 17, 10:36 am
#92
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 37,249
I wonder if you will have to take out the keyboard if it's detached.
Remember: if you fail to take your glucose meter out and they wanted it out, they will have to rub your genitals like Aladdin's magic lamp to clear your glucose meter.
Remember: if you fail to take your glucose meter out and they wanted it out, they will have to rub your genitals like Aladdin's magic lamp to clear your glucose meter.
May 25, 17, 11:12 am
#93
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 24,551
Originally Posted by chollie
I wonder if you will have to take out the keyboard if it's detached.
Remember: if you fail to take your glucose meter out and they wanted it out, they will have to rub your genitals like Aladdin's magic lamp to clear your glucose meter.
Remember: if you fail to take your glucose meter out and they wanted it out, they will have to rub your genitals like Aladdin's magic lamp to clear your glucose meter.
If a TSA Screener wants to give me a feel up I'll be sure to make appropriate sounds for any bystanders who maybe watching.
I won't protest in silence!
May 25, 17, 11:42 am
#94
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 37,249
These concerns have been floating around for a year. The real reason TSA is ramping things up now, just in time to impact the summer travel season, is because they want the money from Congress to go ahead with their new checkpoint CT scanners. The scanners aren't quite ready for prime-time (safety concerns), but hey....that didn't stop TSA from installing the back-scatter machines. There were no taxpayer refunds when the worthless and unsafe machines were removed.
I'd like to know if any of the folks who profited handsomely from the backscatter machines are investing in the checkpoint CT scanners.
When I get an MRI, the operator always stands behind a shield. Interestingly, TSA has vendors claiming that they can effectively shield the CT scanners at the checkpoint - something manufacturers are apparently unable or unwilling to do to existing medical CT scanners. Of course, as we found out from the backscatter, operator and pax safety are not as important as profits.
By making this a worldwide effort, those who stand to benefit greatly increase their profits. The rest of the world will have two choices: pay the outrageous price for American CT scanners to use on pax bound to the US or force those pax to check their electronics. DHS will refuse to consider any non-US designed or manufactured technology.
I hope the new fixation on food and electronics doesn't extend to gate checks.
If there's anyone who believes the TSA assurances that Precheck pax won't be subject to this nonsense, I have a bridge to sell you.
I'd like to know if any of the folks who profited handsomely from the backscatter machines are investing in the checkpoint CT scanners.
When I get an MRI, the operator always stands behind a shield. Interestingly, TSA has vendors claiming that they can effectively shield the CT scanners at the checkpoint - something manufacturers are apparently unable or unwilling to do to existing medical CT scanners. Of course, as we found out from the backscatter, operator and pax safety are not as important as profits.
By making this a worldwide effort, those who stand to benefit greatly increase their profits. The rest of the world will have two choices: pay the outrageous price for American CT scanners to use on pax bound to the US or force those pax to check their electronics. DHS will refuse to consider any non-US designed or manufactured technology.
I hope the new fixation on food and electronics doesn't extend to gate checks.
If there's anyone who believes the TSA assurances that Precheck pax won't be subject to this nonsense, I have a bridge to sell you.
Last edited by essxjay; May 28, 17 at 5:12 pm Reason: merge consecutive posts
May 25, 17, 12:26 pm
#95
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 24,551
A few weeks back a question was posed on the TSA Blog about these unusual screening procedures for food items and such. The TSA Blogger denied all knowledge of any such testing yet today the twitter feed for TSA, @ASKTSA, is saying these tests have been going on for a year.
Guess the TSA Blog is not in the loop or something!
Guess the TSA Blog is not in the loop or something!
May 25, 17, 2:40 pm
#96
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 18,296
UPI:
TSA testing tighter security for carry-on bags at 10 U.S. airports
According to NBC News, those 10 airports are: Boise, Boston, Colorado Springs, Detroit, Ft. Lauderdale, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Lubbock, Phoenix and San Juan.
The Transportation Security Administration has been testing what it calls enhanced security procedures for carry-on bags at several airports in the United States, the agency said Wednesday.
The TSA public affairs office said the tighter security screening for luggage in the passenger cabin is being tested at 10 airports in the country, but did not identify which facilities are part of the plan.
Electronic devices larger than a cellphone are one of the main focuses of the intensified screening.
<snip>
The TSA public affairs office said the tighter security screening for luggage in the passenger cabin is being tested at 10 airports in the country, but did not identify which facilities are part of the plan.
Electronic devices larger than a cellphone are one of the main focuses of the intensified screening.
<snip>
May 25, 17, 3:29 pm
#97
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Would someone explain to me why these "pilot programs" exist. Either foods and electronics are a danger or they are not. If they are a danger, then every single checkpoint at every single airport should be screening these items, not just a certain airports on a "pilot" basis.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute the sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute the sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
Last edited by petaluma1; May 26, 17 at 6:41 am
May 25, 17, 4:40 pm
#98
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 37,249
Originally Posted by petaluma1
Would someone explain to me why these "pilot programs" exist. Either foods and electronics are a danger or they are not. If they are a danger, then every single checkpoint at every single airport should be screening these items, not just a certain airports on a "pilot" basis.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute to sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute to sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
May 25, 17, 4:43 pm
#99
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 18,296
Originally Posted by petaluma1
Would someone explain to me why these "pilot programs" exist. Either foods and electronics are a danger or they are not. If they are a danger, then every single checkpoint at every single airport should be screening these items, not just a certain airports on a "pilot" basis.
THE HILL:
Also:TSA testing enhanced screening for carry-on bags
Excerpts
Excerpts
***
A pilot program, currently being tested at 10 airports, asks passengers to take out larger electronics and other items from their carry-ons and put them into separate screening bins.
***
Cluttered carry-on bags, which have become increasingly more common as passengers try to avoid fees for checked luggage, can take longer for TSA screeners to decipher on an X-Ray machine. Items that can look like explosives, such as tablets, e-readers and food, are easier to decipher if they are placed into separate screening bins.
***
The program could eventually be expanded to other airports, the TSA said.
A pilot program, currently being tested at 10 airports, asks passengers to take out larger electronics and other items from their carry-ons and put them into separate screening bins.
***
Cluttered carry-on bags, which have become increasingly more common as passengers try to avoid fees for checked luggage, can take longer for TSA screeners to decipher on an X-Ray machine. Items that can look like explosives, such as tablets, e-readers and food, are easier to decipher if they are placed into separate screening bins.
***
The program could eventually be expanded to other airports, the TSA said.
CONSUMERIST:
You Could Soon Be Unloading A Lot More From Your Bag At Airport Security
Excerpts
Excerpts
***
TSA agents are currently focusing tests on the items — like food — that can trip up baggage screeners when they show up on X-rays. The idea is to catch these items before they go through a machine. This requires the TSA to ask passengers to remove such items and place them in separate trays at the beginning of the security screening process.
By removing items like chocolate that may show up as a dense blob on the X-ray machines, the TSA is hoping to decrease the chance that bags will have to be manually checked.
***
TSA agents are currently focusing tests on the items — like food — that can trip up baggage screeners when they show up on X-rays. The idea is to catch these items before they go through a machine. This requires the TSA to ask passengers to remove such items and place them in separate trays at the beginning of the security screening process.
By removing items like chocolate that may show up as a dense blob on the X-ray machines, the TSA is hoping to decrease the chance that bags will have to be manually checked.
***
May 25, 17, 4:51 pm
#100
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: UA 1MM, AS MVP, Bonvoyed Gold, Honors Dia, IHG Plat, ...
Posts: 12,913
Originally Posted by petaluma1
Would someone explain to me why these "pilot programs" exist. Either foods and electronics are a danger or they are not. If they are a danger, then every single checkpoint at every single airport should be screening these items, not just a certain airports on a "pilot" basis.
May 25, 17, 5:31 pm
#101
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 13,995
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
Maybe to measure the impact on scanning times and queue lengths?
May 25, 17, 6:13 pm
#102
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: UA 1MM, AS MVP, Bonvoyed Gold, Honors Dia, IHG Plat, ...
Posts: 12,913
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
...and just think about all the drugs and cash they are now going to "accidentally" find?
May 25, 17, 6:27 pm
#103
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 24,551
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
That doesn't explain why they run a pilot. It might be a reason why they want to expand the items that have to come out of the bags everywhere. Unless you meant they want to measure the increased "success rate"?
May 25, 17, 6:37 pm
#104
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 13,995
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
That doesn't explain why they run a pilot. It might be a reason why they want to expand the items that have to come out of the bags everywhere. Unless you meant they want to measure the increased "success rate"?
May 25, 17, 6:38 pm
#105
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 37,538
Originally Posted by petaluma1
Would someone explain to me why these "pilot programs" exist. Either foods and electronics are a danger or they are not. If they are a danger, then every single checkpoint at every single airport should be screening these items, not just a certain airports on a "pilot" basis.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute to sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
As I've said before, I think this is 1. nothing more than an attempt to get more people to sign up for PreCheck or 2. a reaction to the 95% failure rate from testing close to two years ago. It took TSA close to 18 months to institute to sexually assaultive "pat downs" to compensate for failures so it wouldn't surprise me if these new measures are more of the same.
There's also the hidden objective of seeing how much flak it causes.
