The resoning is....IF a bag has to be opened to resolve an alarm, it is both easier and quicker to open it if it is unlocked. If it is locked, and needs to be opened, the bag may be damaged during the process. If the passenger is paged, and never shows up, the bag does not go on the plane unless the alarm is resolved. If the bag is unlocked, the alarm can be resolved and the bag on its way. The sheer number of bags going through the system daily is amazing. Literally MILLIONS of bags every day are screened. Now, if every one of those bags was locked, and say 5% alarmed (thats over 5 times the actual number) then the backlog would result in tens of thousands of bags not making it onto the aircraft. TIME is the main factor here, not a desire to rifle through anyones bags.

Does this open the door for people to do things they shouldn't? Yes, but since when have there been no doors for these people to exploit? Is this system perfect? No, but if there is a better way, lets hear it.



------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

I didn't ask for a reason. I told you I already knew the reason and it isn't good enough.
It's a known fact that TSA's false positive readings ratio is TOO HIGH. Last figure I heard was 30% false positive. What about the false negatives. That's really the "scary" factor. Do you think they run a car through a CTX machine at the white house? No they use mirrors to look under and dogs to alert them to TNT/explosives. TSA should try this. They can easily afford them with the unlimited, unaccountable, budget they have at their waste.
The fact is TSA can do nothing more than private screeners did to make us "safe". I'd rather have it in the hands of the private sector than in the hands of a bunch of unaccountable Goons with deep pockets and dumb ideas of what security is.




[This message has been edited by CarmelGreg (edited Nov 19, 2003).]

Your figures are way off and your opinions aside, it is what it is. You do not have to agree with the procedures, but if you are going to fly, you will have to comply with them. It is that simple, much simpler than your sensationalism.



------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

You don't understand....I don't have to comply and I don't. My lockable luggage is always locked and has yet to be damaged. I'm hoping it will be soon, however so I can rant all the way up the unaccountable chain of TSA command.
Open luggage in customers presence, let a dog sniff it, or don't open it, or hey here's a thought.... how about the TSA being accountable.

Since your no longer with the TSA how about some of your expertise in enlightening me.
I am curious to know what the ratio is these days of false positives.

I say "in the name of safety", "if you knew what I knew","comply or don't fly", "over 12 recommend shoes off", "plese show me and him and him and her your BP/ID" is sensationalism.
We are not only Passengers we are THE CUSTOMER. TSA doesn't get it......

The people complaining are the ones that complain about everything. When asked for a solution they have no answers.

Even if screening goes back to the privates TSA will be regulating them. The biggest problem with privates is they do know who feeds them, the airlines that have the contract. Airlines could care less about passenger safety after you paid for the flight. In the past airlines have told the private companies to look the other way and on the morning of September 11th 2001 that is exactly what happen.

Times have changed. The complainers here want the red carpet rolled out for them when they arrive at the airport. Not happening anymore. The risk is too great.

I wish the complainers knew half of what was really happening.

No, the TSA does get it, you just have a huge chip on your shoulder and admit that you are looking for a fight. The actual number of false positives is well under 3%. I seldom had a positive as we would sometimes go 1-2 days without one. If it was 30% as you claim we would have bags stacked to the ceiling all the time waiting for us to resolve the alarm as it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to do so.

So continue to send your bag through locked, it is only a suggestion that you leave it unlocked anyway, it is NOT a requirement as you seem to believe. Then, IF it is damaged, file a complaint and fill out all the appropriate gov't forms. Then wait.... Or just take the suggestion and go about your life. High blood pressure is a killer and it is such a needless thing to worry about anyway.





------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

This is the last time I'll respond directly to you as you are obviously ignorant beyond belief.

Box cutters were allowed on Sept 11th. No one looked the other way. THEY WERE ALLOWABLE ITEMS. It was the airline policy of "dealing" with hijackers that allowed them to fly into buildings. Your a manager? Your just blind..............

Originally posted by TSAMGR:
The people complaining are the ones that complain about everything. When asked for a solution they have no answers.

Do a search. Plenty of people, myself included, have offered viable solutions. Your agency chooses not to listen and instead gives us condescending BS like "you don't understand what's going on."

In the past airlines have told the private companies to look the other way and on the morning of September 11th 2001 that is exactly what happen.

Nonsense, 9/11 happened because pilots opened cockpit doors and because people cooperated with terrorists. Private security was made the scapegoats of the day but your agency hasn't done anything better.

Times have changed. The complainers here want the red carpet rolled out for them when they arrive at the airport. Not happening anymore. The risk is too great.

Get real. People pay too much money to have to put up with the manure that your agency calls security. In reality, it's just window-dressing harassment.

I wish the complainers knew half of what was really happening.

Those of us who deal with your agency's crap on a regular basis know exaxtly what is really happening. Some political hacks are passing off smoke-screen harassment as airport security. Anyone with any kind of engineering/statistics/probability/materials science background knows your agency for the sham and joke that it is.



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

Typical TSA BS. The highlighted portion of your BS is a LIE. There were NO, repeat, NO violations of procedures on 9/11. If the TSa had been on the jon that day, the results would have been the same.

As for your "if they only knew" BS. I do know security. I have been in the REAL security business for over 19 years. The TSA is WINDOW DRESSING. Period. The next time the TSA does anything related to Security will be the first time.

Good point, TUS. However, assuming I'm forced to live with behind-the-back ruffling, I was pissed in the first half of the year that the TSA didn't provide free seals to at least protect the luggage after it leaves the TSA's custody. "Leave your luggage unlocked for us TSA people in the case a physical inspection is required. We don't give a **** if it's sent unlocked to the airline after it leaves our custody in the event a physical inspection is not required. We're the TSA."

I am still pissed that the TSA seals are rather flimsy and cheap. Obviously, I'm defending the everyday traveler, as I have a bunch of US Customs-approved, high-quality seals that I use myself. The current TSA seals pathetic.

Another issue of interest though: How are alarms resolved in the UK then? (rhetorical question) Very few check-in baggages have to be physically opened. Screeners try to resolve things without a physical inspection. So, there has to be a few reasons for this:

• Sheer numbers of more baggage screened in the US? Faster to yank a lot of baggage open than have screeners closely examine CTX images? Or TSA are not using their screeners to their full potential, i.e. they need more in-depth training on analyzing CTX images?
• US has stricter standards? I heard that the UK uses high-speed x-ray, which has a high false negative rate, whereas CTX has a lower false negative rate but higher false positive rate. Only selected bags in the UK get sent to CTX. But then how are many of those bags resolved?
• FAA/TSA (who certifies the equipment?) hasn't certified more sophisticated equipment that can resolve alarms? There's an article from Wired magazine that Invision (the one of the makers of CTX), developed or is developing a machine that will be able to do a chemical test of a baggage WITHOUT opening it!
  
  
  Quote:

  ---

  <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
  Another promising technology is X-ray diffraction, which InVision, the company that makes the CTX machines, invested in last year by buying a German firm that makes a diffraction unit called the Yxlon 3000. The device can check only 60 bags an hour - the CTX 5500 can handle about six times that - but it could help reduce false positives. "We believe that the magic bullet is the combination of CT and diffraction," says InVision CEO Sergio Magistri. By having a diffraction machine check what the CTX flags, "you can do 500 bags an hour."
  
  In case diffraction doesn't become the new standard, InVision also owns Quantum Magnetics, a San Diego company that's applying MRI techniques to security by using a process called nuclear quadrupole resonance. It involves shooting low-frequency radio waves into an object to stimulate the nuclei of the atoms in it. The electrical response of each substance is unique, so in theory, the units would pinpoint an explosive without false alarms.
  </font>

  ---

While I have my love/hate aspects of the TSA, I'd have to say though that I was glad to read that there are TSA test labs out there. i.e. They're constantly working to improve things.

I'm trying to live through this stupid policy of physical searches with the pax's presence in the meantime. However, having this is as a permanent, long-term solution is UNACCEPTABLE.

- Pat

[This message has been edited by Wiirachay (edited Nov 19, 2003).]

Once again....you CAN send your bags through locked, it is NOT a requirement that they be unlocked. It is only a suggestion. Everyone gets so upset over HAVING to send their bags through unlocked when NOBODY can force you to do so. If they request that you do, say NO if you don't want to. Some people just want to start a fight and love to argue their point. I have made it more than abundently clear that this is NOT a requirement, yet people still argue about it.



------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

Yeah, you're right.

I can't imagine why people get pissed off when the person telling you that you don't have to send your bags through unlocked is brandishing a crowbar, hacksaw, and a pair of bolt cutters....

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

Hmm. I have a nice little fire-safe with pretty serious bolts and a good lock that probably weighs right around the limit for a checked bag on UA. Maybe I should start lugging it to the airport and checking it as luggage.

I can see it now: "Paging Mr. Studentff. Please come and unlock your luggage, our bolt-cutters were unable to break it open."

http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...orum/smile.gif

The ONLY reason they would open it is if it alarmed. The odds of that being EXTREMELY low despite what you good folks believe.



------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

So, the fact that my equipment case gets rifled through EVERY time I fly is just sheer luck?

You are out, time to stop drinking the kool-aid.