I can't answer your question w/r/t Security rules, but I can tell you that ORD is an airport where your "idea" simply wouldn't work. Can't get from inbound airside to outbound airside without going thru C&I. Additionally, once past C&I you could just as easily hop a cab downtown.

I think the upthread post regarding the fact that some/many of our airports don't have the neccesary design features is answer enough.

Best, Dave

Perhaps you'd like to tell the citizens of the City of Chicago what the increase in their taxes will be as you reconfigure ORD in order to avoid having persons from non-VW countries be able to transfer as you've said they should be able to......

Best, Dave

I'm sure others can think of additional examples, but the UK (mentioned before) and Japan most definitely have laws about transfer visas for residents of certain countries despite the fact they have airside transfer facilities.

Steve

Sorry, that doesn't sound very simple to me. You are aware how US airports are laid out, aren't you? The only way this would work would be to put all international flights in ONE terminal at every US airport. That's not going to happen. Billions and billions of dollars are not going to be spent redesigning US airports so that French people can visit Tahiti more easily. It's very simplistic to point to other countries with one (or two) international airports and say, "if they can do it, then so can we." The sheer number of international flights and airports does not make this feasible. Given all this, do you have any other suggestions?

Serious travel agents should subscribe to the IATA TIM (travel information manual). It is published monthly and contains not only visa but also vaccination requirements. See:
http://www.newconcepts.ca/tim.htm

How about making a start by abolishing the need to pass immigration on transit in those airports that took the effort and provide a dedicated international facility. To avoid confusion I guess a visa would still be required for passengers from non VW-countries, but it would save a lot of hassle on transit anyway.
There are nicer ways to spend one's transit between 2 long flights than standing in line for immigration into a country you don't even intend to enter

Almost every other country I've been to requires outgoing passengers to pass immigration both on entry en on exit, giving them a much better degree of control on overstays ; in the case of the US it's all to common for visitors departures not to be registered ; you don't even get a stamp in your passport to prove you've left.

I've spent extra money for direct flights Europe to Latin America so as to avoid US transits because of this issue (made worse be the fingerprinting requirement). I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I notice Air Canada is introducing direct flights Vancouver to Sydney, Air New Zealand's main route to Europe now transits at Hong-Kong instead of LAX, most passengers for Tahiti will now transit through Japan,...
A few years ago I talked to French passengers on a plane from Easter Island to Tahiti. For them one of the advantages of this roundabout route was that they could avoid US immigration (even though this route requires passing Chilean immigration at SCL, and exiting at IPC).

I think these issue will end up losing the US tourism industry and US airlines a lot of money and goodwill until it is corrected.

Offer visa-free transit for same aircraft flights like NZ1/2 (stay on the aircraft) and allow airlines/airports to build terminals with facilities to handle this kind of connection.

If someone is going to say that all pax on flights taking off in the US have to be screened in the US: those pax are already on aircraft in US airspace before landing, so what's the difference?

HNL used to offer sterile airside transit for quite some time.

I don't recall what year it was eliminated (I am guessing after 9/11).

FWIW, I've travelled through HNL as an international transit passenger. I was allowed to deplane, was kept in a sterile transit zone, and re-boarded the aircraft without having to clear security. This was ~1995.

HNL does have a limited facility / infrastucture for intl sterile airside transit, but cannot use it any longer thanks to new US laws.

I'm curious as to what passport the traveller was on.

goodo

I am surprised at Air Canada's response on the SYD-YVR route. Up until recently (Xmas), Air Canada would deny the boarding of the passeger and advise them to go to the US Consulate in Sydney and get the transit Visa, they would then rebook on the next flight 2 days later.

I have been in the US consulate in Sydney and have witnessed passengers apply for this transit Visa and the two cases I earsdropped on had theirs issued same day in the afternoon.

I am sorry Air Canada did not offer this route to the passenger as an option. It is not Air Canada's responsibility to ensure passengers have the correct Visa but it is their responsibility to ensure their passengers travel with the correct documentation.

I am a strong advocate of changing this route back to SYD-Fiji-Vancouver (like the old CP Air days). This would avoid this US nonsense.