I agree.

I will not fly under these conditions and if my airlines of choice fold due to a decrease in travel, then so be it. They should have objected to this crap and to this disgusting agency's antics from day 1.

Comrade Hawley, you can go to hell, hell, hell. :td:

ORD T3, gate E-12 this morning Friday 8/11: NO gate screening of any kind, just a reminder announcement from the GA.

--PP

The full gate screening for every flight must be a pipedream. I don't see how TSA can hope to accomplish this at current manpower levels.

Gone
 

Suppose the long term effect of this one episode is an extra one hour added to the screning time of every pax on ever flight on average.

How many people (used to) fly each day in the US and UK. For the sake of argument, let us say 700,000.

Why that number? A human life span is roughly 700,000 hours. These terrorists did not kill a single pax over the Atlantic, but they are vaporizing out of existence the equivalent of one human life every day from now on.

Good point. ^

To add to it, closer to 2 million people fly each day in the USA. Add in the UK (let's say 800k) and we're up to the equivalent of four humans each day. 120/mo or 1440 annually. That's a lot of wasted time.

I'm tellin ya! This is the excuse that Chertoff will give to doubel or triple his budget! The TSA, one of the biggest jobs programs wince the Work Projects Adminitration, will then be able to hrie even more gum-cracking ne'er do wells to do gateside screening.

Then they will ban more things and require additional screening.

Then we will be required to state the reason for our travel, give the gummint our contact information upon arrival, and eventally submit to background checks before travel.

Someone else on another thread put it very well: Without blowing up a thing or killing any of their own people, Al Quaeda has managed to severaly disrupt American life and business and IT DIDN'T COST THEM HARDLY A THING! By remote control, our knee-jerk security "forces" were jerked around like a marionette on strings and did more damage to more people than the 10 blown up planes would have.

Great going, TSA. Here's some more rope, you're doing fine.

--PP

Yup, totally agree. On more than one occasion, Bart has talked about the concept of "risk management" versus "risk avoidance." The only way to avoid the risk of a mid-air explosion is to keep all the planes on the ground. Risk management is the only possible alternative, which underlies the stupidity of not allowing people to buy beverages after the checkpoint. Is there a possibility that some terrorist traced a particular tampered bottle of Coke or water to the gift shop and decided to smuggle it onto a plane? Sure. There's also the possibility that Martians from the planet Zutroid will land on Earth tomorrow and kidnap Ru Paul. It's just not likely and probably not worth the trouble.

The end of carry-on baggage, if that were to happen, means the end of the business traveler, and the end of the business traveler means the end of the industry. We're not there yet, but who knows?

Mike

full gate screening to return
 

bocastephen is a GENIUS!

To avoid having to deploy resources to gate screen, they could have:

1) banned the sale of all prohibited liquid items through airside vendors until the vendors and airport could...

2) setup fountain dispensers for water, coffee, tea, juice and soda which could be sold in open cups without lids, preventing someone from storing the beverage in their bag...then...

3) have a single screener watch the line to make sure no one boarded with their open beverage cup

Voila...problem solved. No gate screening and no beverage containers on board, but no thirsty customers either.


I TOTALLY agree. Remove the SOURCE of the banned items PAST security!
Do not sell ANY item that the airline will not let on the plane. I know, here we go again with not having any water, BUT if the trade off is hiring enough TSA's to hand screen EVERY flight (how many TSA's will it take to have TWO at EVERY gate in EVERY airport-let's not even TRY to do the math!), I think we have to take the lesser of two evils. Since when has logic ever been able to be used by the airlines and the TSA operation? I'm voting for bocastephan, no matter what he is running for!

1) Not deployed resources to gate screen

2) Not got their panties in a wad over liquids and gels

3) Stopped harassing passengers

4) Invested resources into explosive trace detection technology at checkpoints instead of burning money on additional personnel and parties.

If the rational of the new world of security is not permitting liquids airside we might as well just shut down the air travel industry altogether.

I can understand that until they get a handle on this new threat (well it's not new, it's been done, they just had a new scare) we have to forgo bringing our beverages through security.

But why can't someone buy a bottle of water or a soft drink airside? If the stock in the airside outlets hasn't already been secured, what have they been doing for the last 5 years?

BTW, I read somewhere that at some airports we can't even take a book on board. Are they afraid we might learn something? "The McGyver Cookbook: How to make a *omb with seatback stuffing and lavatory soap." I pray we haven't sunk to this level of idiocy.

And it also would put a hefty dent in the volume of family travel via air. Not to mention adoption travel.

We have gone that low. It's real, and it's been two days .... and counting.

We reached it unfortunately when a plane was diverted for having "BOB" written on an airsick bag several years ago. :(

We're now into the nether regions of the idiocy graph.

That give a new perspective on "The Wetter". Shutting down the lavs wouldn't have stopped his bomb preparation methodology. Maybe his was one of the "dry runs" for the london gang?


I though the drill for FT'ers was to sign the TOC page of the in-flight mag, not to sign the airsick bags?