3-4 hour security lines from here on- will you fly?
 

I have been reading a number of interesting articles that say that the three to four hour security line is going to become the norm in the future and the traveling public will just have to accept it. The media is already having a variety of stores where they find a number of people who are standing in endless lines and the passenger will say they do not mind the long line because it is for safety. (Do they really believe this "happy face (PC)" comment?

Once it sinks in to the average traveler that flying will involve the hassle of having to wait in a line for 3-4 hours, I wonder if travelers will limit their flights to the absolute minimum. What impact will the long lines have on your travel by air?

For me, I'd factor in destination. Previously, I'd fly anywhere more than six or so hours away. Now, if I'm adding in an additional three hours to my flight time, I might raise that minimum to nine hours or so.

If flying doesn't save me a substantial amount of time and effort, I'll drive.

I just saw a live broadcast from O'Hare on CNBC and the reporter said the security lines were moving actually quite quickly and that things were running pretty much on time so far this morning...I haven't tried confirming this, but that is the word on CNBC.

The articles I read about Airline Security said that the new technology being used by the terrorists will require the government to tighten up on the things that will be banned on the plane. In the very near future all electronics will be banned, including battery controlled watches.

There will be so many things that the TSA screeners will have to look for that they will have to move towards a system where:

All items in the carry-on will be reviewed personally by TSA staff for ALL Passengers.

All passengers will be interviewed by security experts, much like the case in Israel.

All this will increase security lines to an average of 3-4 hours very- very- soon.

I would certainly stop flying routes like DTW-ORD, and would instead drive, and when going to out of the way destinations like LSE, I would seriously consider flying via private jet.

My travel yesterday between IAD and ORD had a lot of grumpy people in the security line. While I got a bit agitated with a TSA agent over an empty Nalgene bottle, one woman in a wheelchair got in a big argument with security and another woman started complaining about missing her flight. TSA agents kept saying that everything was done for safety, but I would hate to see what it would be like at peak hours since I was going through security at 8:30 pm.

A 3-4 hour security checkin would destroy the demand for the short haul flights. Who would want to spend 6-8 hours in security for a flight between NYC and DC? It would be faster to either take the train or drive.

As for banning all electronics, the public will not accept that. How many business travellers would travel without their laptops, PDAs or cell phones? How many leisure travellers would fly without their iPods, digital cameras or portable DVD players? I, for one, will not fly unless they allow passengers to carry on laptops. My job requires constant internet access and using a shared computer is not a viable option.

I don't see this as being an indefinite situation. Who has that kind of time especially for domestic flights?

Before
 

What did business travellers do before the age of electronics? Business continued to run and there was peace and quite in the airline cabins.

Gels and such
 

What about lipstick and chapstick and non liquid deoderant are they also banned?

"You don't have a dog in this fight!"
 

A direct quote from my boss! The extra time needed for clearing security and/or for driving will come out of my own time, not company time. My loss!

Also problems with carry on items, items taken by security and expense of getting replacement items at destinations are MY problem.

So "you don't have a dog in this fight" apparently means, "I'm screwed!"

I do have a dog in the fight of how to manage my lap top, confidential files and business papers and my cell phone.

How much can this Old Girl take? I don't know, but retirement is looking better all the time.

Do you really believe lines will be 3-4 hours long from now on? Just because some journalist makes something up doesn't mean it's true.

agreed

The public won't stand for that kind of wait for very long.

People will either change their carry-on habits, fly a lot less or raise too much stink with their politicians.

I'd love to see more train service pop up, but we kind of screwed that up in the era of cheap oil. Maybe now it is time to relook that.

It won't be long before crowded trains attract the kind of attention here that they did in other places that have had those transports targeted.

remembering history
 

I remember right after 9/11 that the security wait time was hour(s), but people adapted and 6 months later the wait times decreased to 15-30 minutes, and recently it would take no more than 15 minutes except during rush hour.
My guess is that people will again adapt and that in a few months it will again drop to "reasonable" levels, maybe not 15 minutes again, but possibly 30 minutes.

Not unless it is completely necessary!!