New security scanner at MIA
 

I flew out of MIA on Thursday June 23 and encountered a new scanner at the Terminal E checkpoint. It was labled GE Entryscan

You must step into a small chamber where you are blasted with airjets. Then you have to wait until a door opens to let you out. Sort of an automatic pat down.

It takes quite awhile, approx 1 minute per person. The line, on a very slow morning soon was backed up like a busy day. What should have been less than a couple minutes wait took me almost 20 min.

There wa quite a bit of public bra and panty viewing as the airjets lifted skirts and blouses.

The TSA goon got rather offended when I mentioned that this new technology sure seemed to slow down the process. He said it was experimental

I sure hope that this contraption goes away. If it doesn't, then I guess we will have to add another 60 minutes or so on a busy day.

It's an explosive residue detector. The "blasts" (GE calls them "puffs of air" :) )are intended to free up any telltale particles and route them to the explosive scanner. There's more information on the device here.

Is it really necessary to refer to TSA employees as "goons?" Try to keep in mind that these are folks that are trying to earn a living and are doing what they are told to do. I know several, and they are decided ungoonlike.

While many of the TSA screeners are decent hard working people, the majority are in fact goons and the poster referred to them appropriately. They are complete idiots with a shirt patch badge who feel taking away liberties without having a clue what they are doing makes us safer. If they had an idea what to do, the might actually be successfully.

I am still interested to hear what happens when someone sets off one of the EntryScan machines ... do the doors lock and trap the pax inside while sirens blare and lights flash? :)

I'm overwhelmed by your insight. Just out of curiosity, how many TSA employees do you know, and what is your basis for condemning the majority of them as goons? My dictionary says that a goon is "a professional gangster whose work is beating up or terrorizing people" or "somebody who is regarded as clumsy or uncouth." I don't know of anyone who has been beaten or terrorized by a TSA employee, and my casual observations of them indicate to me that they appear that have at least average physical grace and personal hygiene. Further, they are almost always courteous. I wonder what observations they might make about you?

There are no doors. If the scanner detects explosive residue, it does sound an alarm.

Perhaps you were expecting that automated Tasers would actuate and stun the passenger into submission?

Does a "sense of being raped" count?

How about $27,224,980 in 12,283 claims against the TSA? Using those numbers, that means 27%, or one in four of the TSA's staffers have the sticky fingers syndrome. Yes, those numbers can be tweaked, given the fact that not every one of the TSA employees have the access to rifle through our bags, ergo that percentage could be higher. And that's just the ones who have bothered to have filed a claim, and if you know anything about law enforcement, not all crimes are reported. Plus, the TSA has been, shall we say, a little less than truthful about things.

I would dispute the "physical grace" notion as the TSA is the lead government agency in on-the-job injury claims. I have seen many TSA staff in DEN alone who wear the burgundy polo shirts, whom I believe are the ones who are arond the CTX machines, who are either out of physical shape or appear to be of the age where their physical condition deteriorates (spoken plainly, too old to be lifting bags day in and day out).

I find it interesting that most of the quotes in that story were from other TSA employees that felt that the conduct was wrong. Someone in the TSA screwed up. It stands to reason that they, like every other organization, will have problem employees.

Actually, I know quite a bit about law enforcement - I teach college courses in it, have published more than 300 articles on the subject, and was a law enforcement officer for fifteen years. You're a long way from making your case that the majority of TSA employees are "goons." You assume that each of the thieving staffers committed their quota of a single theft, then went on to allow someone else to try. That pushes the bounds of credibility. When I was an active duty cop, the typical burglar would have done 50+ burglaries before we caught him (and we almost never caught one in the act). I doubt that people who would steal from suitcases are much different or less skilled in avoiding detection. The number of thieves in the TSA is almost certainly lower than you claim.

As long as they are no less representative of the population at large (and keep in mind that obesity is currently our number one health problem), my analogy still holds. As I just wrote in another forum message, your characterization that "the majority [of TSA employees] are in fact goons" is offensive, untrue, and uncalled for.

While I would hardly be considered a defender of the TSA, I believe referring to screeners as ”goons” is a bit of a stretch. In my opinion, the problems are systemic and not completed unexpected from a new bureaucracy. In general, the screeners are low wage workers with minimal education and training who have been placed into a position where they are encouraged to believe that their mission is critical and therefore many tend to behave with more zeal than is probably necessary or even desirable. Standard policies and practices have not yet become pervasive within the organization and a customer centric culture has not yet been instilled at many centers. To blame the screeners themselves for these bigger failures is no more fair than to blame the individual customer service agents in India for the fact that offshore airline call centers do not provide the same level of service that their US counterparts once did.

Yes....he is a goon
 

In general I get along just fine with the TSA. I can usually engage them in a friendly conversation. I carry a lot of technical equipment and almost always get a secondary because of it. I would say that 99% of the ones I deal with are very professional and quite nice.

I refered to this one as a goon....and rightfully so. I commented in a friendly way that this technology seemed to slow the process. His demeanor when he responded was such that I felt I had better shut up and not speak or I would experience his wrath.

I have had to deal with this type of TSA personality before. When one threatened everyone in line that if they did not do EXACTLY as he said he would see to it that everyone would miss their planes. I challenged him and did end up missing my plane....but he ended up being fired so I guess it was worth it. However, I missed more business by missing the plane than his yearly salary, so since then I have decided to be a sheep and just say Baaaaa when prodded to move on. I don't have time to mess with them.

I feel that if the TSA chooses to experiment with new devices that can cause serious delays, they should at least have someone manning it that has a little diplomacy, tact and dare I say....a touch of friendliness. This guy was not helping the TSA look good at all. A little positive PR effort would not hurt.

By the way...this scanner had doors on both sides. You could not enter or leave the unit until the doors opened.

I don't know. I think the dictionary is pretty accurate on this one. I rate them right along with telemarketers. Polite people would say that they both are "just earning a living" but there are far less abusive ways of earning a living, and screeners have to be pretty insensitive if they don't recognize that.

I hold them responsible for what they do for a living. It's a choice, and they made it.

How many of those are legitmate claims and not fraud?

[QUOTE=copwriter]I'm overwhelmed by your insight. Just out of curiosity, how many TSA employees do you know, and what is your basis for condemning the majority of them as goons? My dictionary says that a goon is "a professional gangster whose work is beating up or terrorizing people" or "somebody who is regarded as clumsy or uncouth." I don't know of anyone who has been beaten or terrorized by a TSA employee, and my casual observations of them indicate to me that they appear that have at least average physical grace and personal hygiene. Further, they are almost always courteous. I wonder what observations they might make about you?[/QUOTE

Silly to get defensive, there's no question, some of them are 'goons'. The majority are quite professional and do their job respectfully. I travel enough to see both. You might as well defend Postal Employee's from the "going postal" terminology; It's based on some degree of reality. :(

Allright listen up, don't eat any Mexican food before flying through Phoenix or Miami. :D

I was chosen to go through one of those puffers at Boston's new Terminal A. The process took long enough and there was only one booth so not everybody could use it during crowded times.

They did not search my baggage. The only reason I could thiink of for being selected for this was wearing a bulky sweatshirt.

Travel tips:
http;//members.aol.com/ajaynejr/travel.htm

(They did not suggest I take my shoes off and I did not.)

If this is true (I've not seen the machine in action), I imagine there will be another rightful howl of protest from female travelers. I would presume that one is not allowed to hold one's blouse or skirt in place.

Another question: if one is stuck in this contraption for 60 seconds, how is one able to keep an eye on personal belongings?

And does one still have to remove one's shoes?

Ummm
 

You tell us; you're the one with all the TSA answers.

Going by your words, you question the labeling of the majority of the TSA's 45,000 employees as being goons. Obviously, you have some first-hand knowledge, and have met the majority of said 45,000 employees. I cannot say that I have done the same.

But for the people who haven't met the majority of the TSA workforce, like myself, my experiences and readings of them, both the people on the front lines and and the policy they have to execute (or arbitrarily modify), it will take a lot more to convince me to have a more favorable opinion, or justification, of this organization.



I'm just going by the TSA's own numbers. Sure, one could consider the simple division of number of claims against the number of employees as being borderline crude (defined in more ways than one). However, the TSA isn't very forthcoming about things, and those are the only numbers they want to release.

The TSA plays the PR hand whenever they can, starting with the ties and their appearance of their staff at the checkpoints, and if they're only going to divulge those vague numbers, those are the numbers I am going to stand by for right now. If I write the TSA, or their local DEN PR person Mike Fierberg, I highly doubt that I am going to find out the exact number of TSAers that have been disciplined or fired through incompetence or theft.


You're entitled to your analogy. If you want to play the game of one-upsmanship, you're more than welcome to play yourself.

I think you're confusing me with someone else. I never said the TSA staff are goons. I asked a question about it, but never said that.

By your words, you're saying that we should have every government agency hire people "representative of the population at large." When is the last time you've seen a Secret Service Agent with a 52" waistline running around near the president? How about an astronaut with only three of her or his limbs?

Special circumstances or qualifications for the specific job at hand, you say? That's my exact point about the TSA staff and their physical duties.

But also keep in mind that the TSA, as an organization, is less than fair in employees rights. Ask eyecue or Bart about the documents they had to sign before collecting their first paycheck. Not the ones about swearing themselves to secrecy about SSI, but the ones that kiss their rights goodbye.

Back on topic, I think these machines do have a lot of potential, though that 60 second wait per person, if true, doesn't seem workable.

red456 makes a good point about keeping an eye on your belongings - I hadn't thought of that.

What GE should have done with these devices is design them such that it was designed to scan dozens of people at once (with alarm positives resulting in more filtered screening). Of course given one device scanning one person requiring approximately 45 to 160 seconds of process time, GE's (deep-pocketed) customers (aka the government and the taxpaying base) will be buying a lot more machines if they are interested in keeping delays near present levels.

Oh god...

Look, TSA is not the only one that touches your precious baggage. TSA sends it out, it goes into a baggage loading facility where it is then loaded into the cute metal bins that go in the belly. Things go round and round on a long belt and is pulled by the airline crew.

Get off your high-horse pal. If you dont know how the system works, lets keep finger pointing to a minimum shall we?.

Thanks.

Can you imagine the hell it would cause if the machine alarms?

Full open on the dozen passengers, full pat-downs, searches.. you name it.

Forget that! One at a time please!

1. Was that question directed to you?

2. If I said that I wasn't the only one who handled my carry-on bag and I said my teenage son put his switchblade in there, would you believe me?

3. I'm not on any "high horse," I responded to an equally dumb question, because those source numbers came from the TSA themselves.

4. Take a laxative, buttercup. This is an internet message board. Complaint forms about my posts can be filled out by hitting ALT+F4.

1. Doesnt matter.

2. No. Not my problem, your should still be aware of who touches your bags and what is inside.

3. Claims are claims. I claimed I hit a pothole on a city street and it broke my suspension component. So? .. but in reality I hit a curb by accident.

4. Yea, thats amazing.


Thanks.

I had already thought of that, but a given alarm wouldn't necessarily deliver a worse outcome than what we are on track for now. It depends on how the filtering process worked and the refinement of the area scanner. Two or three area scanners and then two individual ones would be cheaper, no slower and result in greater pressure for the devices to be maintained properly and be more effective.

60 seconds is an exaggeration. The machines can handle passengers every 10 to 20 seconds, with 4-10 seconds of the time used for detection/analysis and the rest of the time for people to shuffle through.

Aside from the skirt lifting, this unit seems like a good innovation (and a good way to end undressing/shoe carnival/etc.). Perhaps GE could innovate and produce a unit that blows downwards instead of upwards? (Dearest GE- you can have that idea for free.)

Im sure GE thought of blowing downwards, but I would think that the floor is the dirtiest part of the machine. Therefor it may foul the filter system quickly. If it shoots upward, where the air is cleaner, it wont disturb it as much. Thats my basic theory.

I believe the real reason GE has the air shoot upwards has to do with convection; they're attempting to tease out particles that are already airborne via the body's convective currents (there due to body heat). Or so says GE's website, anyway.

I haven't yet witnessed a real-time observation of GE's device in action with real passengers, but if this and the "backscatter X-ray" became mandatory, there is no way process time with the current generation of devices will take less than 60 seconds. The X-ray device alone requires scans from multiple angles of a passenger in order to be meaningful and that requires some footwork manipulation that translates into a few minutes for first timers and no less than a couple of minutes for "professionals".

My understanding of these machines is that they are initally to be used for those unlucky ones who are selected for secondary screening. The theory being that the secondary process would be significantly faster. i.e. no need for the hand wanding and pat downs. With all technology there are definate downsides. GE entry scan is not the quickest thing in the world, but it is effective. Heck they had one at the mall here and it works quite well. They had some explosives (a bullet) and it picked it up.

The backscatter machines are good and bad. Exposing us to radiation isn't good, though the radation levels are suposidly less than you get in 8 hours of flight time. Then there are the privacy issues and the issues of abuse. The latest proposal that I have seen has a program to place blackouts over the genital areas and the breasts for women. The only time a screener would see below that would be if there was an alarm item there. (software programing to determine this). The advantage is that there is almost no place for a person to hide an item of any material on them, short of swallowing them.

The issue will become how are the machines used. TSA has a goal of no more than 10 minutes in line, so until the processing times are fully known, I think these machines will be used for sampling and SSSS and not become part of the regular screening process.

The above "latest proposal" won't work tomorrow. And even with the machines set at the "advertised" levels of "safe", there are ways to still hide items on person that are well short of swallowing thems. Can we find a bookie to handle bets on when the first "celeb" body images will show up in the tabloids or other publicized domain.

If we get lucky with these applications, we'll catch ourselves some idiots, some unfortunates and a few terrorists acting like members of an "advance team". If we get unlucky, we are, to some degree, going to find ourselves passively twiddling our thumbs until the next "grandiose" terrorist plot comes aviation's way (or gets shifted elsewhere). In the air or on the surface, communicable disease or improvised chemical explosions may come to mind and the current applications, even if tweaked, will do little except fight the last fight.

That's what I would think too.

They have had these things in Gulfport, Mississippi, for quite a long time. It's a small airport that nothing happens in. Weird...

TSA putting our tax dollars to work in the way we have come to expect. Thank you, feds.