TSA mulls a plan to eliminate security checkpoints at 150 smaller airports

[Rushie]

What if I told you that you could take the blue pill and there could still be security screenings that weren’t run by the government... and the airlines cools offer whatever level of security the self loading cargo in the back desires, and pass it along to them on their ticket price?

Be amazing how many people might decide they could take their chances when the debt money stopped flowing by the billions.

The cheap airlines could just hand everyone on board a baton and give the flight attendants firearms. People in exit rows get pepper spray. The good stuff, not the watered down civilian stuff.

The video selfies from those flights would be epic and highly entertaining.

Yes. On a Frontier flight recently I was in the very first row aisle seat (no first class) and got to see the procedure when Captian wanted to come out and use the lav. FA used the trolley sideways to block the way to the galley and stood behind it with a murderous look on her face. Cockpit opened, flight crew came out, used facilities, were given food, and I got to see out the front windshield.

I thought, oh, I see how it is, so I put myself on high alert and resolved to jump onto anyone attempting to break through that and I'm sure I was not the only pax to do so. I even stuck my foot out into the aisle. Passengers simply will not allow another 9/11 style attack, at least until those of us old enough to remember it die off.

I know that won't stop someone sneaking explosives aboard and trying to set them off in the back of the plane. Or put something in the cargo hold. There is no way to be 100% secure. But I would think the airlines themselves would have explosive sniffers and do about as good a job as the TSA preventing that.

I hear the problem moving the security to hubs and I hear the solution doing away with hubs. Who knows what the future will bring but one thing is certain: it's highly unlikely the Feds are going to reverse this massive seizure of control that is DHS and TSA. I think that ship has sailed.

And ... did you mean the red pill or is it the blue one? I never can keep that straight.

 

[wayne]

Really? I don't think that there will be another successful attack or hijacking of an American airliner in our lifetimes. Look at the people who have had meltdowns during flights and how many passengers have swarmed them to get a punch in as others tackled them.

Possible, but very challenging. A hijacking? No. All attempts since 9/11 have been stopped by the flying public. Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, is 6' 4" and over 200 lbs. The passengers took care of him easily. Someone carrying 50 lbs of plastic explosives and setting it off, yeah, that could happen if there was no screening. Of course that's possible now. Even in the TSA's own check, they are failing 95% of the time.

" In all, so-called "Red Teams" of Homeland Security agents posing as passengers were able get weapons past TSA agents in 67 out of 70 tests — a 95 percent failure rate, according to agency officials."​

Not sure what you’re meaning.

In the 70's and 80's one would just check-in, and walk to the gate. Family and friends could go to the gate and wait with the travelers before they took off. A little more security started in the 90’s or so but it was really just to verify the ID of the person against their ticket. No screening or metal detectors. I’m even old enough to remember the days when you could go straight back to the gate and just watch the airplanes even if you weren’t traveling, so I’m really not sure what you’re talking about.

Where did you fly out of? I distinctly remember metal detectors in airports in the 90's. I'm pretty sure they were there in the late 80's too. I rarely flew before that and was a kid. Yep, Wikipedia says they were used starting in 1973 due to hijackings.

I'm amazed at the number of people in Hartsfield now, and know that only passengers are there; other than the rare exception. I can't imagine how crowded it would be if others could still go out to the gate.

 

[mscard88]

Time to rethink hub and spoke?

Just send the RJs direct and avoid the craptacular hubs altogether?

Regional I flew at also flew a lot of point to point besides the hub spoke flights, which they fly mainly.

 

[FlyingElvii]

This was an exercise that the TSA goes through every year. The question was come up with a plan to cut $100 million from our budget. This was one of the answers. It's an exercise to see what ideas come up and if something comes up that makes sense. What I heard, on the news, is that the TSA is not considering this, yet anyway, I doubt it will happen.

In the past, many small “Local Service” airports did not do security. That was done at the large airport they flew into, in a separate area. Cessna or Beech from whatever EAS city pulled up to an outbuilding, or “ commuter terminal, got off of the plane( or were bussed), were screened, then proceeded to the connecting flight. It just does not make sense to have $750,000 in security payroll for an airport boarding 20-30 people a day.

That said, as a long-time employee in airports, the security setup before 9/11 was a joke. The airlines were responsible for and paying for thier own screening, and Lowest cost providers using whatever gov-subsidized payroll employees they could find, with just cursory screening. I have long said that TSA was a huge mistake, the airports and the security/police departments they already have could have done a better job, cheaper. They know thier own areas and soft spots better than any DC bureaucrat.

TSA is a Jobs program with LOTS of political patronage positions to be handed out. It also created a single political choke point for most of the US economy. Unionized TSA. Imagine the chaos if Unionized TSA went on strike.

 

[mscard88]

Right......, shoot through the bulk head which has not been hardened and kill both pilots......or just blow the effing thing up over a densely populated area....

Wrong on the hardened door. Yes they were flimsy before 9-11 but that was changed to a secure door. Shoot through that door and the crew might just return fire too!

 

[mscard88]

Y
And ... did you mean the red pill or is it the blue one? I never can keep that straight.

There's a red pill now?!

 

[FlyingElvii]

Yes. On a Frontier flight recently I was in the very first row aisle seat (no first class) and got to see the procedure when Captian wanted to come out and use the lav. FA used the trolley sideways to block the way to the galley and stood behind it with a murderous look on her face. Cockpit opened, flight crew came out, used facilities, were given food, and I got to see out the front windshield.

I thought, oh, I see how it is, so I put myself on high alert and resolved to jump onto anyone attempting to break through that and I'm sure I was not the only pax to do so. I even stuck my foot out into the aisle. Passengers simply will not allow another 9/11 style attack, at least until those of us old enough to remember it die off.

I know that won't stop someone sneaking explosives aboard and trying to set them off in the back of the plane. Or put something in the cargo hold. There is no way to be 100% secure. But I would think the airlines themselves would have explosive sniffers and do about as good a job as the TSA preventing that.

I hear the problem moving the security to hubs and I hear the solution doing away with hubs. Who knows what the future will bring but one thing is certain: it's highly unlikely the Feds are going to reverse this massive seizure of control that is DHS and TSA. I think that ship has sailed.

And ... did you mean the red pill or is it the blue one? I never can keep that straight.

The soft spot always has been, and always will be the ramp. Despite all of the precautions, they still bust people for moving contraband and drugs around security procedures. With lowest cost contract ramp, that issue is just not going to get better. A $10 an hour employee is easy to bribe, to look the other way.

 

[mscard88]

The soft spot always has been, and always will be the ramp. Despite all of the precautions, they still bust people for moving contraband and drugs around security procedures. With lowest cost contract ramp, that issue is just not going to get better. A $10 an hour employee is easy to bribe, to look the other way.

Bingo! Recall the drug smuggling and/or weapons going on between rampers at Miami and Atlanta a few years ago. Another ring from South American to US flights. And on and on...

 

[RyanB]

Where did you fly out of? I distinctly remember metal detectors in airports in the 90's. I'm pretty sure they were there in the late 80's too. I rarely flew before that and was a kid. Yep, Wikipedia says they were used starting in 1973 due to hijackings.

I'm amazed at the number of people in Hartsfield now, and know that only passengers are there; other than the rare exception. I can't imagine how crowded it would be if others could still go out to the gate.

It was circa '99 or '00 at CHA. Mom used to take me to watch the airplanes from inside the terminal. I remember just walking straight through and going back to the gate. It's possible that there were metal detectors, but I don't recall any. Lovell Field is a small Charlie field.

 

[SkyDog58]

The soft spot always has been, and always will be the ramp. Despite all of the precautions, they still bust people for moving contraband and drugs around security procedures. With lowest cost contract ramp, that issue is just not going to get better. A $10 an hour employee is easy to bribe, to look the other way.

Yep. Low paid employees, many of which at major airports speak very poor English which indicates little time in the USA and possibly little or no loyalty to it.

 

[mscard88]

It was circa '99 or '00 at CHA. Mom used to take me to watch the airplanes from inside the terminal. I remember just walking straight through and going back to the gate. It's possible that there were metal detectors, but I don't recall any. Lovell Field is a small Charlie field.

Hmm, not sure about that Ryan. I flew often to CHA from ATL during that time and had layovers there. I think they had at least metal detectors.

Oh, did I know your mom, and that why she was there? Oh c'mon, I kid I kid!

 

[wayne]

It was circa '99 or '00 at CHA. Mom used to take me to watch the airplanes from inside the terminal. I remember just walking straight through and going back to the gate. It's possible that there were metal detectors, but I don't recall any. Lovell Field is a small Charlie field.

They were there. I flew out of CHA in '89 for interviews; I was at UTC getting my MBA.

It was more casual than now, more like getting into a sporting event, but without the lines as there are not many travelers at CHA.


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Art Rose]

Example after example continues to prove Tsa is nothing more than a very expensive feel good knee jerk waste of my tax dollars, time, and resources. EPA is another one. This latest move is good. It's about time.

 

[RyanB]

Hmm, not sure about that Ryan. I flew often to CHA from ATL during that time and had layovers there. I think they had at least metal detectors.

Oh, did I know your mom, and that why she was there? Oh c'mon, I kid I kid!

They were there. I flew out of CHA in '89 for interviews; I was at UTC getting my MBA.

It was more casual than now, more like getting into a sporting event, but without the lines as there are not many travelers at CHA.


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Roger. Like I say, they might've been there, I just don't recall, but if y'all remember them, than that confirms it.

 

[mscard88]

Roger. Like I say, they might've been there, I just don't recall, but if y'all remember them, than that confirms it.

You know what, now that I think about it, CHA allowed us to bypass security there. We walked thru the ticket counter and out the back door, across the ramp to our spaceship. Unless it was raining, pilots melt when wet ya know.

 

[wayne]

Roger. Like I say, they might've been there, I just don't recall, but if y'all remember them, than that confirms it.

I get it. I don't recall the details around a flight or two I took as a kid. It was way too expensive back then to fly much. We drove on long trips to visit family.

My kids on the other hand have flown since they were infants.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[weilke]

Right......cuz a CRJ only makes a small burning hole in the ground...... It's a stupid idea. Who's Gonna stop that. Uncleared and in the airspace system is the main point. A simple alteration in tactics will net a huge gain for bad actors. Just like lonewolf actors which are on the rise and terrorist leaders have called for. Board a CRJ, kill the flight attendant, shoot through the bulk head which has not been hardened and kill both pilots......or just blow the effing thing up over a densely populated area....

You created a scenario of someone with 50lbs explosive getting on a 777 unscreened. Nothing in the TSAs budget games suggested a scenario that would make that possible.

 

[Rushie]

The soft spot always has been, and always will be the ramp. Despite all of the precautions, they still bust people for moving contraband and drugs around security procedures. With lowest cost contract ramp, that issue is just not going to get better. A $10 an hour employee is easy to bribe, to look the other way.

I've seen YouTube videos of employees opening bags in the cargo hold and stealing stuff from them. Probably would be very easy to do the reverse. Do those guys get TSA security screening when they enter the ramp area?

 

[mscard88]

Do those guys get TSA security screening when they enter the ramp area?

Nope.

I used to notice our rampers coming to work with a bag as big as our overnight bags, apparently empty. Observed them at quitting time walking out to the bus stop straining to carry them. I'm sure they contained soft drinks and snacks from catering.

 

[RyanB]

You know what, now that I think about it, CHA allowed us to bypass security there. We walked thru the ticket counter and out the back door, across the ramp to our spaceship. Unless it was raining, pilots melt when wet ya know.

Hey man...you know what?

 

[mscard88]

Hey man...you know what?

But I said when it rained we went through security!

 

[weilke]

The biggest issue I see, if this ever happened, is now you are adding even more congestion to the already congested checkpoints at the hub airports. Plus the small EAS carriers would have to reconfigure their operations to the non sterile side of the airport and make arrangments to get their passengers to the curb of the terminal somehow. The plan isn't just talking about Boutique or ACO's 8 seat planes, it extends all the way to 50 seat RJs.

Pax wouldn't go to the curb. In a hub like MSP there would be a checkpoint at the base of the A or B concourse

 

[AKBill]

Sorry but it is. Can’t convince me that being able to walk straight onto an airliner is the same safety level as being screened prior to entry.

Would you need screening if everyone flew only with their birthday suites on? Scary thought..

I remember by dad handing his 30-06 to the captain and the captain holding it for him in the cockpit...

 

[denverpilot]

You created a scenario of someone with 50lbs explosive getting on a 777 unscreened. Nothing in the TSAs budget games suggested a scenario that would make that possible.

That’s all this is, of course. TSA feeling out public sentiment on how “scared” the sheep are.

OMG! They might not screen at 150 podunk places! Give the poor dears another couple billion dollars, quick! Scary Mary says we should be scared!

The alternative is the mainlines go back to paying for security at podunk outstations so the security lines for government bread, er junk fondlings, er “security”... don’t get too long in the hubs.

And we all know that isn’t going to happen.

Having two hours of part time TSA at every podunk airport is even more security theater than the security theater crap show that never ends in the hubs.

TSA wants to know if the sheep still feel safe when they see smurf-suited $17/hour actors with tin badges. If they do, they’ll leverage it into a few more billion by saying they’ve run out of money.

Just like local governments who magically run out of money for roads after the tax money also magically disappears to things other than roads.

 

[denverpilot]

Yes. On a Frontier flight recently I was in the very first row aisle seat (no first class) and got to see the procedure when Captian wanted to come out and use the lav. FA used the trolley sideways to block the way to the galley and stood behind it with a murderous look on her face. Cockpit opened, flight crew came out, used facilities, were given food, and I got to see out the front windshield.

Truly the golden age of flight right there.

Gotta let the flying monkeys out of the cage to poop and get a sandwich now. Hahaha.

 

[Unit74]

You created a scenario of someone with 50lbs explosive getting on a 777 unscreened. Nothing in the TSAs budget games suggested a scenario that would make that possible.

Yea, I did. And I suggested another that you completely ignore and not comment about.

 

[Unit74]

Wrong on the hardened door. Yes they were flimsy before 9-11 but that was changed to a secure door. Shoot through that door and the crew might just return fire too!

You didn't read what I wrote. A bulkhead is a bulkhead. A door is a door. Bulkheads are not hardened.

 

[3393RP]

I don't think we can assume that the lack of terrorism on airplanes can be credited to TSA. I think the terrorists know passengers would never allow that scenario again. And cockpit doors were reinforced. Those are the reasons it hasn't happened again, imho.

I believe this wholeheartedly. The passengers on airliners represent overwhelming collective security, and no one is getting past the cockpit door.

A bomb might kill 300 people, but why bother when softer targets on the ground with ten times that many possible victims abound?

 

[AggieMike88]

 

[paflyer]

I don't think we can assume that the lack of terrorism on airplanes can be credited to TSA. I think the terrorists know passengers would never allow that scenario again. And cockpit doors were reinforced. Those are the reasons it hasn't happened again, imho.

Since 911, more people have died as a result of murderous pilots behind reinforced cockpit doors than terrorists.

 

[paflyer]

That was never the case.

It was before a rash of hijackings in the late 60's and early 70's. Metal detectors didn't get placed until 1973.

 

[paflyer]

To me, this is the scariest segment of flying commercial:

 

[Everskyward]

Scary Mary says we should be scared!

The sad part is that Scary Mary is right. I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of people would be scared, or at least worried, if this happened.

 

[denverpilot]

The sad part is that Scary Mary is right. I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of people would be scared, or at least worried, if this happened.

One would hope intelligence is on a bell curve and it wouldn’t be a majority.

Suffering fool’s fears and the few people actually paying positive net taxes for “security” costing billions of dollars is regressive for society.

They’ll get over it if Podunk, USA doesn’t have two par-time groin gropers in their little EAS town, I’m sure.

They can have the Sheriff stop by during the daily boarding of four passengers bound for exotic lands, like Chicago, if they’re still scared.

 

[denverpilot]

To me, this is the scariest segment of flying commercial:

Mooooo.

Airlines have learned a lot from feedlot operators over the decades.

 

[paflyer]

Mooooo.

Airlines have learned a lot from feedlot operators over the decades.

It's a freaking killing field.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

It was before a rash hijackings in the late 60's and early 70's. Metal detectors didn't get placed until 1973.

That’s nice

 

[denverpilot]

It's a freaking killing field.

Most public places with crowds are, these days.

At least if you don’t have to check bags, you can go straight to the other side of the metal detector.

Check in counters on the outside of the secured area are a deathtrap if someone wants them to be. The guy who tried in Texas (I think it was?) got to meet his maker.

Technically, at least here anyway, you can still be armed on that side of things if you desire, also.

For luggage security, nothing beats checking a firearm with your underwear. It is a great way to make sure TSA doesn’t paw your underwear or even be allowed to open the luggage out of your sight.

There was a great talk about that at DefCon a few years ago. It’s on YouTube.

Guy caught them still trying to open his stuff, but he locks firearms in multiple metal security containers with all of his teaching materials (he’s a lockpicking expert) and used the best non-TSA locks on them he could find.

He found crowbar marks all over the outside of his travel cases. They didn’t get in.

An actual security expert: 1, TSA: 0.

If you ever need to travel with something nobody should see or know about without you personally watching them inspect it, and knowing who’s seen it, stuff a cheap handgun inside a security case with the stuff you want protected, and then follow the normal checked firearm rules. Make the box nice and big and heavy and metal so it can’t easily be “lost” either. Pay the extra weight charges.

Excellent security and all quite legal. Cheap insurance against a $17/hour person stealing whatever you’re traveling with, in the back room, out of sight.

 

[weilke]

Yea, I did. And I suggested another that you completely ignore and not comment about.

Well, you certainly went back, read the article and replaced your scenario with a differernt alarmist hypothetical.

But sure, I can comment on that one too:

Right......cuz a CRJ only makes a small burning hole in the ground...... It's a stupid idea. Who's Gonna stop that. Uncleared and in the airspace system is the main point. A simple alteration in tactics will net a huge gain for bad actors. Just like lonewolf actors which are on the rise and terrorist leaders have called for. Board a CRJ, kill the flight attendant, shoot through the bulk head which has not been hardened and kill both pilots......or just blow the effing thing up over a densely populated area....

The short answer is: That's just a minuscule risk we are going to have to live with.

The long answer:

- not having TSA physically provide screening at outlying airports would not mean that pax originating from those airports would not be subject to screening procedures. First there is the screening of the individual passenger. Ole Larson, million miler with GlobalEntry who lives at the same address in Jamestown,ND for 25 years is not the same security threat when he boards an EAS flight in Jamestown as Abdi Abdi a 21 year old somali kid with only two years of residence record from 5 different apartments in Minneapolis. Maybe one of them requires screening and the other one doesn't ?
- given the abysmal work quality provided by TSA, having some off duty Stutsman county deputies or JPD officers man the checkpoint for an hour before each flight would provide a higher level of security at a fraction of the cost ?
- the history of RJ sized planes crashing in 'densely populated areas' shows that the risk to people on the ground is modest. The 10 or 15 EAS pax on the RJ may be exposed to the risk of a terrorist boarding in Jamestown, for the uninvolved on the ground the risk from a RJ getting commandeered or brought down is so small that it just disappears into the noise of 'general life risk'.
- How long do you think it will take until the rest of the pax dogpile your hypothetical attacker ? History has shown that that is what happens if someone becomes a threat that goes beyond random drunken boorishness.
- while the bulkhead and the door are not hardened, they do consist of multiple layers of aluminum with wiring and electrical equipment in between. Successfully disabling two pilots by shooting through a door with anything but a long gun is going to be very very difficult.

- I'll let you in on a secret: Every day, the sky over this country is criss-crossed by hundreds of bizjets with mtows similar to a RJ occupied by pax who are either not screened at all or only screened in regards to their identity by the charter broker who put together the flight. Other business and freight aircraft overfly the country to land in third countries without ever encountering the soft touch of those blue TSA gloves. They should be plunging into stadiums full of football spectators every week, but they don't.....

 

[weilke]

To me, this is the scariest segment of flying commercial:

My worst nightmare is being locked into the underground bunker at Dulles that holds the checkpoint together with 1000 of my fellow unscreened passengers. TSA and the MWAA have successfully created the most inviting target for an IED attack on the east coast. Glad if I am not in 'gen-pop' and able to bypass this target area by going through the small 'Pre' facility.