Boggie Dog

At least some no count agency can declare a WoD victory.

84fiero

While it's no doubt true that there are more electronic gadgets, cords, etc. in carry-ons than there were in the "ancient past"...and it I can buy that this has some impact to looking at the x-ray images for weapons or bombs (or what magnitude I've no idea)...

...But the proliferation of personal electronics in carry-on bags has been this way for years. Yet they want us to believe that they just recently discovered that their machines and operators are having trouble with that?

WillCAD

Well, that's one thing I could accept as true - that a problem takes five to ten years to get from the rank-and-file TSO up the line to the leadership before something is done to 'correct' it.

We've actually known about the electronics issue for a while. For years, standard advice to infrequent travelers has been to pack their bags neatly, wind up cables, and use bags with multiple compartments to organize their electronics. This makes it safer to pull a bag with camera and computer gear through a crowded airport (stuff won't bounce and bump together if organized neatly in compartmentalized bags), but it also makes the x-ray image more coherent for the operator, so he's less likely to call for hand inspection because he can recognize more of the bags contents as harmless and permitted.

On the other hand, if you've thrown your crap randomly into a backpack, with devices, batteries, and a rat's nest of cables floating around at random, the image is more confusing, and the operator is more likely to call for hand inspection.

Of course, you're also more likely to have a hand inspection if your bag contains certain types of objects like books or granola bars or water bottles, regardless of how neatly it's packed.

richarddd

Get Ready to Unpack for Airport Security
Travelers should expect new procedures at TSA checkpoints later this year, with more carry-on items, like food and tablets, separated into bins

The cluttered bag appears on the screen looking like a kindergarten art project gone haywire. With the uncluttered bag, shapes are easy to identify. Even if the cluttered bag doesn’t get pulled out for manual checking, it takes the screener more time to study the image.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/get-rea...ity-1495640411

Stgermainparis

I have Pre and my bag got pulled for further inspection b/c of food at MEM. I had 2 frozen steaks and some frozen mashed potatoes in there (long story). The agent said the organic food is so dense that it shows up questionable on the scanner. She just looked at it and put it back in. Didn't send it back through scanner.

Boggie Dog

What would be the point of an xray do over? A quick visual should resolve almost all questions.

inet32

An old story by CBS says that foods like cheese and chocolate can look like explosives on airport screening machines . . .

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chocolat...irport-x-rays/

The point of any pilot program is to work the kinks out of a new procedure before scaling it up to the whole system. You need to know how well some new process works, how long it takes, what kind of training works best, what kinds of problems or surprises you might run into, etc.

This is pretty standard in any industry for any new procedure you're rolling out.

chollie

What isn't standard is for the organization conducting the tests to lie to their customers and the public about it.

If I ask a TSO when they changed the procedure to require snacks out, and I fly through the airport weekly, why does the TSO lie and tell me it has always been that way? If the TSO doesn't want/can't talk about it, then just say so.

inet32

The sad thing is that when it's the government I think it IS standard to lie about it.

We see this problem all over the world, and at many different scales: police and security forces will inevitably have more success if they get the public on their side. But just as inevitably, they do things which alienate the people they're supposed to be protecting. It's crazy, but it's really the same problem whether it's local cops alienating the people in some inner city neighborhood or TSA/HSA giving us frequent flyers wrong, contradictory or incomplete information, and thus alienating us.

petaluma1

TSA doesn't work the kinks out of anything it does. Either food is a potential danger or it's not; either electronics are a potential danger or they are not. So TSA starts a pilot program to try to determine how much these potentially dangerous items jam up checkpoints instead of simply telling everyone at every airport all foods and electronics out of your carry-on.

richarddd

I believe the rationale is that it's hard for the scanner person to see these things properly when jumbled with other stuff in luggage. If they are removed, it's easier to see them. Screening may work better with the new system.

In order to figure out if it actually works as intended, they are testing it before rolling out.

It could well be a reaction to the high failure rate from prior testing. Isn't more accuracy a good thing (subject to the costs of more accuracy)?

From the stories, they are having a hard time telling if food or electronics are dangerous, so they are trying to determine if they can do a better job examining them with a new system.

This seems better than an outright ban on food and electronics in carry-ons.

Boggie Dog

TSA had extreme problems just training screeners on acceptable ID's. TSA is the sand in the cogs. If I recall it took a couple of years. I think the pilot program, in this case, is to see just what the public will tolerate. I've had about enough TSA to last a lifetime. TSA is both expensive and ineffective.

Pesky Monkey

The real idiocy of this whole charade is that once again a vague foreign threat is identified (remember the liquid bomb bs) and then the remedy is to bog down US flyers with the burden.
Number of terrorists caught by the TSA? Still zero.

chollie

Are the xray operators more poorly trained than their counterparts overseas? Is a two-week paid vacay at the 'academy' (given even to folks who had already been on the job for a decade) really not enough?

Of course, I don't see xray techs overseas trying to do their job while distracted by their co-workers' personal conversation.

This is all about expensive new equipment that the TSA wants. Not content with American markets, TSA wants to force countries around the world to pony up to line US manufacturer and politician pockets - no other technology will suffice.

If the public balks at paying the price for the overpriced-for-the-taxpayer CT scanners for the checkpoint, TSA will suddenly discover that xray techs can't properly screen rollaboards for concealed nastiness, and all pax will be required to empty their rollaboard contents into bins. TSA is going to bring lines to a grinding halt until they get their way.

petaluma1

New CT equipment can't find explosives which is why TSA opens so many checked bags and items within those bags. I do believe that soon everything in a carry-on bag will be required to be removed and placed in a bin.

As an aside
And while I am at it, since TSA believes that parents who refuse to allow food for their infants to be opened need to be thoroughly groped and tested for explosives, why not just test everyone for explosives? If residue is going to transfer from "explosive" baby food, it's going to transfer from "explosive" electronics and granola bars also.

As with the electronics-in-the-hold boondoggle, if there is a true threat, then such attempts to ameliorate said threat should have been instituted immediately and across the board. No "pilot programs" or negotiating with the EU.