Reroutes and SSSS
 

Last week thunderstorms in Northeast caused major delays on CO and US; pax were being rerouted on DL through ATL, had to go to the DL counter for a new boarding pass. EVERY ONE of the reroutes got the dreaded SSSS designation. Screening/searching took so long that the DL flight was delayed.

Great software! Gives me great confidence in all other aspects of the system.

The air carrier could have deselected these passengers (just a key stroke) but chose not to.

CAPPS I doesn't account for this factor. CAPPS II would have.

CAPPS II is dead...
 

...get over it. In lieu of security theater that would have turned every airport into an internal border post while making flying more dangerous, the TSA is simply going to have to do something useful, like providing real transportation security.

-Bill

someone say something about cake and eating it too?

How is flying more dangerous? Could you provide some proof or are you ...uming as the rest here.

[QUOTE=TSAMGR]I was clearly referring to CAPPS II, a prime example of security theater which would have turned every airport into an internal border post while making flying more dangerous. I trust you missed the conditional verb due to a long, hard shift ignoring lead-lined bags.

Bad fake cop. No fake doughnut for you.

-Bill

So instead of answering the question (which obviously you don't have an answer for) you try to divert the subject by name calling.

Just another poster who degrades the integrity of this forum by whining and name calling instead of discussing the subjects.

You asked me how flying is more dangerous. I don't think flying -is- more dangerous. I think flying -would- be more dangerous had CAPPS II been implemented, but as the program is dead, the point is moot.

As for name-calling, I believe the record shows you started the fun & games by putting '...' in bold in reference to my previous post.

QED,

Bill

While CAPPS I is a joke, CAPPS II would account for that factor and much more. CAPPS II was esentially an internal border control system. Can you say, "Papers, Please?"

Thankfully CAPPS II is dead now.

SDF_Traveler

Again, how would it be more dangerous? You threw it out there but won't back up your statement. Now you want to change the subject by stating it is a moot point.

As far as using ...ume, if you do a search you will see I use it often. It was not directed at you exclusively.

Please (re)visit my website , specifically the section on the Carnival Booth effect.

Since this post appears to be an advertisement for your web site and may be violating the terms of service of this forum I choose not to visit your site.

As you're probably on duty surfing the web instead of searching bags, I wouldn't want you getting into trouble visiting the 'wrong' websites. Besides, if you are not familiar with Carnival Booth it is worthless to have a CAPPS II discussion with you...oh, and CAPPS II is dead.

To the future,

Bill

TSAMGR,

The fact that CAPPSII would make air travel more dangerous is well established. An MIT group put out a thorough analysis of many variations of the CAPPSII scheme, which analysis you can read for the mathematical details. The basic premise is that selectees under CAPPSII know that they are selectees after they get questioned and searched intensively at the airport. A group of conspirators can use that knowledge to defeat selection by sending many many members on "probing" flights to find out which of its members is a selectee and which not. Then the members who are not selectees will be the ones sent on a terrorist mission. Those members who are not selectees MUST have a lower probability of being super-screened than the CAPPSII selectees have, even if CAPPSII were to include some random mechanism for making even non-selectees occasionally get super-screened. A group of terrorists could use CAPPSII (and CAPPSI, since it works the same way with a different selection criteria) to give its bad guys the lowest possible chance of being super-screened.

On the other hand, selection utterly at random or super-screening of every passenger can't be defeated by a smart enemy.

Same thing happened to me a couple of weeks ago in HSV. The WX and a broken airplane combined with Friday PM DL overbooking caused them to book me on a NW codeshare through MEM. Sure enough, the SSSS printed out on the NW boarding pass. I kicked myself for not printing out Spiff's tried & true rules for defeating the SSSS. The funny thing was that the NW gate agent didn't seem to care. No band of roving screeners showed up at the gate, although I already had finalized my game plan -- making them change gloves, etc. I held my thumb over the SSSS when I gave the boarding pass to the gate agent and I boarded unharassed. I don't know why. :confused:


(Oops -- fixed a typo.)