awayIgo

Absolutely not! As is, pre-COVID,you got to the airport hours before to go through TSA. Add more people and it will take longer.Say goodby before security.The world doesn’t end. I have close relatives living overseas. I can go 6-8 months without seeing them. I have survived not going to the gate with them.

Redheadpeter

It's crowded enough in there without letting any Tom, Dick or Harry through. Making security checks even more crowded and slower. They want something to eat - there are plenty of restaurants elsewhere, they want to watch the planes! - they can do that without going into the secure area. The more people you let through the higher the risk of one of them being a bad person. You can say goodbye to people at the check-in desk. Crazy idea.

eventmgr

You are going to let some people in without screening and screen only ticketed passengers? So a non screened person can carry a gun in and give it to a screened passenger after TSA check???? That’s safe. And people better start reading the full First Amendment and understand it’s not a blanket permission for any group to gather anywhere. That claim is over used and abused.

Athena53

That would be my concern- many airports don't have enough seats in the boarding area, anyway. My home airport is MCI and I sometimes resort to plopping myself down on the floor against a wall somewhere. (I am reserving judgment on how this will change with the fancy new Taj Mahal MCI that they're building as I write this.) In many airports when I arrive for a very early flight the line at the airside coffee shop is agonizingly long.

And wouldn't the airlines hate it? Right now you can't get airside without an ID and a boarding pass for a flight unless you are subject to additional search or you get a pass at some airports to accompany someone, which takes extra work. Allowing more people with no boarding pass airside would facilitate using someone else's ticket. You can't use one you bought, your friend or family member can, they get through the TSA with whatever screening is required for sharp and pointy objects and they get on the plane. Airlines would lose revenue they'd ordinarily get when a ticket was unused.

Kremmen

Are you going for the "biggest straw man ever" award? Absolutely nobody has suggested this.

Did you see a vast change when non-passengers were suddenly no longer allowed? Were there ever a significant number? Most of them spend most of their time in restaurants and such anyhow, not at the gate. An equipment change from an A319 to an A320 will probably add 10 times as many people to your gate lounge as the average number of non-passengers.

GUWonder

Airports may take out seat areas in gate areas in order to incentivize airport visitors to spend money at the retailers paying the airport owner/operator rent and even at times a proportion of sales. Airports in the aggregate in the US should want to pack in customers for the retailers, if trying to maximize revenue. That means opening the gates to screened visitors, whether ticketed or not.

Spindle2465

Only for meeting or seeing off the elderly or sick or children pax. Airports and airport security can be overrun at the best of times. Why add to the bedlam.

bvi7

Thank you for this list. Very timely as my sister and I are flying into SEA tomorrow and originally our arrivals were only an hour apart - now 4 hours. The third person in our party who lives in the area can now join my sister in comfort in the new AS lounge while they await my arrival.

dliesse

As I remember, the "passengers only" rule was instituted solely because of increased processing times after the 9/11 incidents. What I'm not so sure I remember 100% correctly is that the rule was supposed to be very temporary, until TSA could ramp up its staffing to necessary levels. Instead, it's turned out to be like the World War II "temporary barracks" at Lackland AFB that I stayed in during my ROTC field training in 1979!

As one who likes to just go watch planes, I'd be all in favor of eliminating the passengers-only rule. In reality, there aren't so many of us as would make a significant difference in processing times (I, for one, would not be stupid enough to go sightseeing at the airport during the morning rush -- even if I wanted to get up that early in the first place). And there's nowhere outside the airport where we're allowed to watch anymore, either. (At least they get it right at Manchester, UK -- two observation points, both sanctioned by and encourage by the airport. I haven't been there for a few years so there could be some COVID-related changes, but at least they don't ascribe an ulterior motive to anyone with an interest in transportation.)

That said, I'll acknowledge that at the moment COVID-19 could be a reasonable reason to temporarily reinstate the rule, but it should be "unrestored" as soon as feasible.

MiscMel70

Someone said "...just like the old days". Oh lord. No. Just....NO.

I wax nostalgic as much as the next guy but I'm going to assume this is all tongue in cheek (?). Hey, I remember getting out of the car at MDW, taking about 100 steps and being through security with my parents who were just hanging out while I waited for my flight to Georgia for summers with Grandma. Then, stepping off the plane a couple months later and my dad would be there at the gate waiting for me when I got off.

But...this is FlyerTalk so I know every one of y'all been in more than a few airports. Can you imagine heading into the Admirals club, exhausted, just wanting a seat, charging capability, and a drink BUT IT'S MORE FULL THAN USUAL (occupancy limits? can you even get in? Looking at you CLT) because a bunch of Sunday Loungers are shooting the crap and "watching the planes"...for HOURS? Wait. How many times can this happen before the lounge just isn't inviting/worth the cost?

So you leave to go grab a bite elsewhere...but those already long lines are LONGER because, well, there are folks hanging out now. Some airports are, in fact, cool. No Problem. Let me just grab one of these cool rocking chairs and sit. Oh wait. Folks are sitting in the good seats, "plane spotting" and they don't move...CAUSE THEY HAVE NOWHERE TO GO.

And, yea, it's not your fault your connection is tight but GOOD LUCK trying to maneuver through an already congested airport because it's EXTRA packed with folks WITH NO DESTINATION just meandering....

Someone mentioned MCI. Imagine non-ticketed passengers going through security there. WHERE WILL EVERYONE SIT?!?!

I'm not being ageist...I gots me some metal implants (thanks Uncle Sam) but, lets be honest...whose gonna go hang out at the airport when they're not flying? Old folks and non-flyers...All piled up at security.

Ain't nobody got time for that.

WillCAD

No, absolutely NO ONE has ever suggested that people be let into the secure area without screening. I have no idea where you got that impression.

I think the 'using an unused ticket' argument is pretty moot; I cannot imagine that unused air tickets, costing hundreds of dollars each, constitute more then the tiniest of blips on any carrier's bottom line. Unused gift cards or ticketless travel funds, perhaps, but not purchased tickets, not when they can be converted to credits for future use.

I recall that the pax-only rule was instituted solely to reduce the number of people screened at any given checkpoint. I don't recall anyone ever saying it would be temporary.

There are plenty of places with excellent views to watch planes outside the secure area. It's just as easy to greet or send off travelers from outside the secure area as it is inside the secure area. Most airport businesses are doing just fine on revenue from pax alone (pre-pandemic, that is) and don't need an influx of sight-seers to keep them afloat; who is unwise enough to go to an airport only to shop or dine when the same stuff can be had a few miles away at significantly less cost without a security screening?

I am perfectly content to keep the secure area limited to passengers only in perpetuity. Crowds are not my favorite thing, and even with the limits, crowds at airports are usually somewhere between "uncomfortable" and "excruciating" even for travelers with a higher tolerance than my own.

TWA884

The Admirals Club, the United Club and the Delta Sky Club all require members and guests to have a same day boarding pass on their airline or a partner airline for admittance.

gligor1

By the way, JetBlue will permit you to go to the gate to pick up an arriving passenger IF it is specifically noted in the arriving passenger's PNR (i.e. your name, address -- verifiable against a photo ID -- and request for gate access). I assume this is true more generally -- but it is definitely true at JFK.

GUWonder

Even after 9/11, there was a period of time when I was able to use one or more of those club memberships to have airside meetings even when not ticketed as a passenger. I recall calling up to get the AC@LAX to let me in a few times after 9/11 for meetings even when not ticketed to fly AA or any AA partner airline. I am pretty sure I was doing this even more than a year after 9/11.

I don’t recall airport security lines being super-long just because there was no ticket requirement for a club member to have an airside meeting in a conference room at the airline lounges. And that was before and after 9/11.

TWA884

With respect, I was responding to a member who was concerned that the Admirals Club would be overcrowded "because a bunch of Sunday Loungers are shooting the crap and 'watching the planes.'" That is quite different than reserving the Admirals Club conference room for meetings.

Let me just add that the rules limiting admission to the airlines' clubs to passengers with boarding passes, which are linked in my post, went into effect in 2019 - January 1, 2019, for the Delta Sky Club and November 1, 2019, for the Admirals Club and the United Club - well after 9/11, so I am not sure what is the relevancy of your experiences "more than a year after 9/11."