Isn't it more accurate to say something like "I can identify some/most explosives on which I was tested using the x-ray machine. So can all the screeners on my team. I can identify some of/most of the test items in shoes, laptops and a host of other configurations. Same applies to knives and guns."?

Aren't screeners counting on mistakes by bomb makers and smugglers in doing a poor "finishing job", indicators of detonators, wiring, "out of place" items, organic-looking things, etc.?

That is, there are explosives that cannot be detected by most of the x-ray screeners in the US using the current x-ray equipment.

A couple of points about air cargo.

The cargo that moves via UPS, FedEx, DHL, and a few other all cargo carriers is not screened by the TSA; rather the regulations are set by the TSA and the carriers screen. Majority of the US mail is moving via all cargo sources, I believe FedEx and DHL have the contracts at this time.

Domestic US cargo is not completely screened-rather it is random. The TSA employs a "known" shipper process, which is outlined on their site. Simply put, if the shipper has a history, the cargo is subject to screening, but, it can move via both commercial and all cargo flights as the shipper is validated.

Prior to 9/11, anyone could drop freight at an airline, generally without much restriction.

In my opinion, the problem exists with the freight forwarders. These companies are the middle man between the shipper and the airline. Yes, freight forwarders are subject the TSA rules, but ways exist to circumvent these rules to generate revenue.

The reality of the situation is that this problem can be controlled with a ban on cargo in the bellies of domestic US flights-whether the shipper is known or not.

I suspect air cargo domestically was not banned after 9/11 is that the airlines needed any and all sources of revenue as passenger travel was down. Although, the revenue generated from this activity varies by carrier due to route structure and equipment, it is not the airlines main source. From what I understand, a large percentage of this revenue drops straight to the bottom line.

Times have changed and airlines have become profitable as air travel has increased and they have right sized their fleets. No longer are wide bodies (767, 777, 747) used when a narrow body (737, A320, A310, 757) will suffice.

In addition, alternative sources exist to move "emergency freight". Charters are available and will become more prevalent once the air taxi service comes to fruition. Another source is direct to consignee truck service-a team of drivers can go from LAX to JFK in about 36 hours or less.

My biggest concern at this point is that these individuals are working on an alternative method to create an unspeakable event. I do not recall the source, but, determination was a big factor in the catastrophic events of 9/11. The planners were not inept and exploited our weakness.

Banning domestic air cargo from passenger service makes basic economic sense, the alternative use of a limited resource (Money/TSA spending) is of greater use in the development and purchase of more sophisticated methods to offset the cabin/in flight risks.

I know the airlines would never give in to banning air cargo from international passenger service since it tends to be such a cash cow for them. Pax wouldn't like it much, either, since fares would have to skyrocket to make up the difference.

Is domestic cargo that much less lucrative of a market that it makes sense for the airlines to drop it? I'm asking an honest question, not criticising the point, and read over the alternatives you proposed for moving domestic freight. What about USPS mail and cargo, for instance? I can see the big carriers operating their own fleets, but I'm not as sure USPS could ramp up to that level of operations or find someone else willing to take their packages for a rate consumers would accept.

And I know that explosives can be concealed that neither you nor your fellow employees will find.

It's one thing to be able to identify those little test images that are built into the x-ray's software.

It's quite another to identify explosives when someone has gone through the trouble to replace materials with similar density materials, reassembled the shoe so that it appears to be unaltered and does not thoughtfully include the detonator and timer (if desired) in the shoe. The same is true with laptops and other containers.

I maintain: Comrade Hawley is a liar. X-ray inspection is no more effective at identifying bombs than is looking for people who are self-proclaimed terrorists.

I am not sure that this is always the case. For example, CO flies both the 767-200 and the 757-300. Both carry approximately the same number of passengers, but the cost to operate is higher for the 762. The reason for flying it: much larger cargo capacity (and longer range). So if CO is not able to fill that underbelly, times could become difficult. Also noted that the CO specials for this weekend are the most that I ever recall out of Houston. Appears that loads are down. Think it has anything to do with the new regime?

I am curious as to if any of the screeners on board have found while operating the x-ray machine shoes with explosives in them that led to the arrest of their owner?

No, but I'm sure they have "heard" of someone who has ;)

Deleted

Any reason to be confident that "competent" terrorists can't circumvent current screening processes to smuggle explosives past the TSA? Other competent individuals have little trouble wittingly or unwittingly smuggling items past the TSA ... even repeatedly. So I don't see why explosives would be any different. Do you?

Can you identify all that are presented to you? How do you square your claim with the DHS report?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You got some of it right. Thats what I was talking about.

Deleted

Agree with your point regarding international air cargo. On this topic, they have a longer turn time and generally require drops at their cargo facility hours in advance of the flight, this in itself lends to a better screening process. El Al is the best for cargo screening. In addition, some of the major players in the international market still run freighter service, i.e., Cathay Pacific.

To answer your first question regarding domestic cargo. The market is not lucrative. Majority of the US air freight (private not postal) moves on the three large cargo carriers, FedEx, UPS and DHL.

The domestic air cargo market has been shrinking for several years. The main reasons are the amount of trucks and better supply chain management by companies. Also, we have moved manufacturing off shore which contributed to a significant decline from the mid 90's to present.

In order to fill the bellies domestically, the airlines will generally charge anywhere from $0.15 per pound to $1.00 per pound based on volume, dim weight, service level, etc. in order to gain business. Without going into detail, it is cheap and rates of $1.00 per pound are rare, an average would be in the $0.40 per pound range.

Second point regarding postal. There has been a steady migration from the airlines over the past 5 or 6 years to cargo carriers. DHL handles international and FedEx moves domestic priority. Most of the US mail moves via truck.

Hope this is of assistance.

They just need to start from scratch. Use the X-ray machines and Metal Detectors, just like in the old days. If they can't find the problem with those two items, oh well......Like I have said, there is no change in safety since pre-9/11 that I see or feel. It is a FALSE feeling they are giving the the masses. Not hat I feel threatened at all with TSA, it just doesn't make any sence.