I'm assuming that the way FLL got the instant "fix" was to just crank the metal detectors from "requires an army tank" level to the "gnat's belt buckle" level. Instantly they catch anyone with a box cutter. Also anyone without one.

Is nearly everyone getting stopped these days? How long is it taking from arrival at the airport to cleared-and-at-the-gate status?

I passed through FLL yesterday (first time since Sept 11) and they have now got a serious attitude.

THOROUGH luggage checks for checked luggage - agents taking litterally everything out of your suitcase to see what's in and putting them back one piece at a time.

Going through Security, they checked the back of my belt buckle and my pen. Serious business....

Glad to hear they have improved. It is sad that the improvement came after they were chagrined by Sheriff's deputies and caught the attention of Congress and the media--not because of doing their jobs right from the beginning--or certainly after 6000+ were slain.

SkyMiler,

I was in dire need of a laugh today and this completely did the trick..thanks.

------------------
Travel light, travel cheap, travel often

Speaking of FLL and airport security, I just emailed this letter to the FAA.
----------------------------------------
I am a frequent flyer and am very concerned about airport/airplane security. The new security at the nation�s airports, since September 11th, succeeds at nothing more than inconveniencing the flying public. Are we really supposed to believe that confiscating nail clippers and matches will prevent a September 11th type attack from happening again? Let�s face it; none of the current security procedures will prevent terrorists from getting on those planes.

This past weekend, I flew roundtrip between Fort Lauderdale and Nassau. I took a good walk around the �secure� area in both airports. Assuming I wanted to hijack a plane, I looked around for things I could possibly get hold of and use as a weapon. Both airport gift shops sell numerous souvenirs and other items made of glass or porcelain. Breaking just one of those objects, would make for enough �knives� for any group of terrorists. Anyone intelligent enough to plan a hijacking or terrorist attack, is bright enough to figure out something this simple.

Assuming that taking away nail clippers and matches will make the skies safer, there is still a major security breach. When I returned from Nassau, I realized I had an old pocketknife and a book of matches in my toiletry kit, both of which had been in there for years. I went through security checkpoints FOUR times without either item being found. At the last checkpoint in Nassau, security personal went through EVERY person�s luggage at the gate. They confiscated several nail clippers and lighters, but did not even come close to finding my �contraband.�

I am every bit as concerned about airport security as anyone else. I do not mind being inconvenienced as a result of this either. But the airport security, even since September 11th, is a joke. I do not claim to have any answers. But having better trained security personnel at the checkpoints would be a good start. If we are to be inconvenienced as a result of security, let�s at least have REAL security that will make a difference.

This is all very scary and I agree with many of your points, however, I think we must also remember that what occured in NY, DC and Penn was "new" in the world of terrorisom. Hijackers in the past have always used guns and other heavy duty weapons. The question is what happens when we benchmark FLL to other U.S. aiports. Also, What happens when we benchmark U.S. airports to others accross the globe? What are they doing that we aren't? Or maybe they aren't doing anything differently as they aren't being targeted like the U.S.

i had a carry on bag for about 20 yrs. [ it finally got beyond repair]. it accumulated a lot of stuff during that time. 2 or 3 yrs ago , going thru heathrow to ireland from us, i spent about 15 minutes while the bag was searched . finally they found a tire guage which i didn't think of when i was asked if i had a pointer. [gauge was put in bag for car trips]. i'm starting over w/new bag w/o guage. heathrow & gatwick security has been a step or 2 tighter than other european airports imho, but the guage was caught only that 1 time. i'm not flying til 10/22 [dfw-lhr-cpt-cruise-lpa-mad-dfw] we will be very careful w/luggage. this probably doesn't apply to the topic, but i thought of it & figured i'd up my post count.

[This message has been edited by clacko (edited 09-30-2001).]

You know, the FLL story doesn't scare me. It's ATL (an airport I actually fly into) that scares me.

Some guy got past security and then realized, oops, he'd walked through with a loaded gun -- undetected. This was after September 11.

But it's really not surprising. According to the story "hundreds of guns, a knife, and even two bombs failed to attract attention at Hartsfield's security checkpoints during the past four years." This resulting from 759 security breaches that they know about.

One year's summary report found, undetected, 249 handguns, 5 rifles, 192 other loaded weapons, and 76 additional unloaded weapons. Some further FAA tests smuggled in a pipe bomb, two dynamite bombs, and two hand grenades.

The good news for ATL is that it isn't the worst -- it's only 8th worst. So 7 other airports (including LAX and PHX) had more security breaches detected.

Another fun statistic -- the ATL security screeners make $7/hour. If you work fast food there, you make $7.25/hour.

Do you want fries with that?

http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...ML/000086.html

I don't think everyone is really thinking through the whole situation here. You are being VERY naive (sp?) to be surprised that these items are getting through security.

Until a total and complete removal of every item in your bag takes place, you can not even get close to 100%. Until we eliminate computers, electric razers, hair dryers, pens, rollon carriers, wheel chairs, canes, strollers,etc., you will not get near 100%. All of these items could hide weapons. Until we remove normal equipment from the terminal and planes (like fire extinquishers, armrests, etc), you will not have total security. While you are at it, maybe we should not allow people to wear glasses? What about a man made arm or leg? Neck brace?

If the security people tried to get 100% of the knives, the American Public will have a fit. I have gone through security 4 times since this happened. Yet, they finally took my nail clippers on 3rd one. At one airport, Montgomery, they were going through the bags of almost everyone. I KNOW it did not make a security difference, but it will make many think about bothering to fly again.

Get real folks. We can not be 100% protected. But maybe we can fight back next time. We must get on with our lives.

Two questions:

1. Anybody know how the post 9/11 measures introduced in the U.S. (e.g. no nail clippers) compare to those at European airports and/or at TLV?

2. Are the above airports regularly tested in a similar way and does anyone have any figures on failure rates?

I remember when flying Ryanair out of Hahn (little more than an airstrip), the security people there could speak at least German AND English fluently, and noticed the scissors in my backpack and measured them to see if they need to keep them. This is better than I've usually experienced when flying in the U.S.

As for TLV, at least in the 70's, they used to hire college students (who had succesfully completed their 2/3 years in the IDF) to do security. That's how my parents met (they both took the job to get through college).


Other comments:

Neal I hope you sent a copy to your congressperson. I think they might care more to hear your opinion than the $8 an-hour FAA employee (ex-airport security guard promoted for having basic literacy) who will put your correspondence into the dead letter box.

NoStressHere

Are you suggesting that it's not possible to improve the current state of airport security in the U.S.?
What about the fact that Israel (popular target) has been very effective in preventing hijakings in the last two decades?

Yonatan

Yesterday morning, I flew from IAD to FLL (via Charlotte) and back again that night. I had one carry on bag and it did not get opened and searched at IAD or FLL. The only difference I noted (besides the armed marshalls at IAD and the usual questions now about carrying objects) was that at FLL, the security guard made me take my hat off after I passed throught the detector (it didn't go off)...just wanted to make sure I wasn't hiding anything under the hat.

Unless the canister was made of lead, presumably any nail clippers, knives, or other weapons hidden inside would be clearly visible on the x-ray machine. Although the x-ray establishes there's nothing hidden inside, it doesn't establish what the object itself is. Once they understand what it is, there should be no worries about other things inside. The big problem is getting them to understand what it is in the first place, and why someone would want it.

You have to understand that a large part of the "improved" security measures is to convince the public that it's okay to fly again. I have no problems with this, as clearly there is a confidence problem with the flying public. But, it's disturbing that the FAA wants to use the force of law to silence anyone that points out defects with the system. Actually, this is a tried-and-true tactic long used by bureaucracies, government or otherwise. If they are able to silence the opposition, then it's a lot easier for them to spread their message.

Loaded guns, yeah, and hand grenades, oh well. Too bad about the bombs. Those things could conceivably be small. Guess I'll have to live with a few hundred loaded handguns

But rifles? Shouldn't x-ray detect rifles going through security?

Oh, and the most recent security incident at ATL involved the person walking through security with the handgun in his pocket. He didn't get beeped, or if he did, no one seemed to care.

Then again, I'm actually not worried about it. I don't think serious hijackers would take the risk of even a 10% chance (I'm just making up a number out of thin air) that they could smuggle a loaded gun through. Too risky for a large-scale operation to chance.