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

[denverpilot]

- 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.....

What?! Surely you jest!

Next you’ll tell us that they even clear Customs at little airports where the only thing keeping them in the airplane until the Customs agent comes out and provides personalized service is a stripe of yellow paint!

Say it isn’t so! Bizjets are coming for your children!

Where’s Scary Mary? She needs to issue a press release and do a news conference and the talk show circuit about this, immediately!

 

[Unit74]

You are still wrong..... I never read the article at all. And you have not addressed the bulkhead either. There is no hardening other than the door. Just lightweight honeycomb structure behind the pilots.

No passenger dogpile required when a backpack full of TATP or HMTD turns the hull into a descending debris pile from 26k ft. Hate of TSA and ignorance of the bigger threat picture show just how ignorant people are and how soon they have forgotten history.

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:



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]

You are still wrong..... I never read the article at all. And you have not addressed the bulkhead either. There is no hardening other than the door. Just lightweight honeycomb structure behind the pilots.

I am not wrong. I stated that you apparently didn't read the article as your first alarmist scenario would simply not be possible under the proposed changes to TSA screening policy.

No passenger dogpile required when a backpack full of TATP or HMTD turns the hull into a descending debris pile from 26k ft. Hate of TSA and ignorance of the bigger threat picture show just how ignorant people are and how soon they have forgotten history.

You are trying to move the goalposts.

A sophisticated attacker could mount another Lockerbie style attack by circumventing TSAs current screening policies.

 

[denverpilot]

No passenger dogpile required when a backpack full of TATP or HMTD turns the hull into a descending debris pile from 26k ft. Hate of TSA and ignorance of the bigger threat picture show just how ignorant people are and how soon they have forgotten history.

Give us a break. None of these podunk outstations have explosives detectors capable of catching TATP. You’re reaching pretty hard.

Then one guy who got TATP aboard an aircraft in small quantity was completely missed by TSA in a hub airport for chrissakes. It’s the last thing you want to use as an example of why we shouldn’t find the TSA utterly useless and expensive security theater.

If you have a backpack full of those, good luck making it to the airport in the car. A well placed speed bump would take care of that particular example.

 

[Rushie]

You are still wrong..... I never read the article at all. And you have not addressed the bulkhead either. There is no hardening other than the door. Just lightweight honeycomb structure behind the pilots.

No passenger dogpile required when a backpack full of TATP or HMTD turns the hull into a descending debris pile from 26k ft. Hate of TSA and ignorance of the bigger threat picture show just how ignorant people are and how soon they have forgotten history.

I agree with you about forgetting history. Do you realize that the people who will become eligible to vote this year were only one year old when 9/11 happened? That's right, the current newly "adult" crowd has zero memory of it and only knows what his parents told him or what he's seen on MSM.

But I disagree about the bigger threat. The actual ignorance is when people want to spend billions on something that is in reality only a tiny risk because there is an opportunity lost where that billions could have done much more good. The risk for an individual to be a victim of a terrorist attack via one of these planes is vanishingly tiny but the risk for an individual to die in a car crash on an uncontrolled access undivided highway is very high relatively. I would rather see those dollars going to upgrading the local highways in the produnk areas. Add lanes, medians and on-ramps and you have an actual real benefit in lives saved. Even if a terrorist attack occurs because you have no TSA at the podunk town, your net lives saved will be much, much higher. The true ignorance unfortunately is that most people are too stupid to connect these dots.

Although I grant that the Feds probably wouldn't put that money to good use; they'd probably waste it on some other useless thing like sending it overseas or researching the mating habits of the yellow tufted whatchmacallit or subsidizing wind over coal so we can all have rotating blackouts on windless summer days - which is coming btw. But I digress...

 

[dmspilot]

I agree with you about forgetting history. Do you realize that the people who will become eligible to vote this year were only one year old when 9/11 happened? That's right, the current newly "adult" crowd has zero memory of it and only knows what his parents told him or what he's seen on MSM.

But I disagree about the bigger threat. The actual ignorance is when people want to spend billions on something that is in reality only a tiny risk because there is an opportunity lost where that billions could have done much more good. The risk for an individual to be a victim of a terrorist attack via one of these planes is vanishingly tiny but the risk for an individual to die in a car crash on an uncontrolled access undivided highway is very high relatively. I would rather see those dollars going to upgrading the local highways in the produnk areas. Add lanes, medians and on-ramps and you have an actual real benefit in lives saved. Even if a terrorist attack occurs because you have no TSA at the podunk town, your net lives saved will be much, much higher. The true ignorance unfortunately is that most people are too stupid to connect these dots.

Although I grant that the Feds probably wouldn't put that money to good use; they'd probably waste it on some other useless thing like sending it overseas or researching the mating habits of the yellow tufted whatchmacallit or subsidizing wind over coal so we can all have rotating blackouts on windless summer days - which is coming btw. But I digress...

Well I was with you until the last part. Air pollution kills more people than car accidents.

 

[Rushie]

Well I was with you until the last part. Air pollution kills more people than car accidents.

Actually you are right but the highest deaths from air pollution are in third world countries breathing smoke from the cooking fires in their huts. Bring coal plants and electricity to these people and you prevent millions of deaths caused by breathing bad air. Its all relative.

Edit: I take back that I said you are right, I don't think that in the U.S. air pollution caused by coal plants kills more than car accidents. Deaths from lung disease probably does, but the fraction of that attributed to coal fired plants is very small. Many other sources contribute to air pollution and the number one is cigarette smoke. Subtract smoker deaths first, only non-smoker lung disease deaths not otherwise caused (like cystic fibrosis etc.) can be attributed to air pollution and then coal plants are only a fraction of that. I don't have time to get the numbers but I bet car accidents might top that number.

Second edit: in fact just from memory I recall that deaths among coal miners is actually higher than deaths from coal plant air pollution. I don't know if that is still true since mining operations are much more automated now.

Third edit: but at least glad we agree that money could be spent on something else other than TSA in podunk towns

 

[midwestpa24]

Give us a break. None of these podunk outstations have explosives detectors capable of catching TATP. You’re reaching pretty hard.

I would rather see those dollars going to upgrading the local highways in the podunk areas. Add lanes, medians and on-ramps and you have an actual real benefit in lives saved. Even if a terrorist attack occurs because you have no TSA at the podunk town, your net lives saved will be much, much higher.

You know, I get there isn't much respect for TSA, but why does everyone feel the need to insult us in rural areas?

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Give us a break. None of these podunk outstations have explosives detectors capable of catching TATP. You’re reaching pretty hard.

Then one guy who got TATP aboard an aircraft in small was completely missed by TSA in a hub airport for chrissakes. It’s the last thing you want to use as an example of why we shouldn’t find the TSA utterly useless and expensive security theater.

If you have a backpack full of those, good luck making it to the airport in the car. A well placed speed bump would take care of that particular example.

I would have agreed with that statement until I recalled the Brussels bombings in 2016. Suitcases full of TATP. You could still rightly say they had "good luck"- I certainly don't care to mess with those compounds even on a much smaller scale.

As for detection, ion mobility mass spectrometry has been used for some time at airports and detects TATP. I know those units are fairly inexpensive for laboartory field use, but I've no idea which models, or how much they cost, are used in airports.

https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/web/2016/03/Explosive-used-Brussels-isnt-hard.html

 

[kayoh190]

There is no hardening other than the door. Just lightweight honeycomb structure behind the pilots.

Depends on the plane, but on your typical narrowbody you're gonna shoot through the galley - ovens, coffee makers, etc...then through the bulkhead, the circuit breaker panel, and through the FO seat? The CA side is probably easier as there's usually a lav there, but you're still shooting through a mirror, the bulkhead, and depending on the airplane another circuit breaker panel or jumpseat, and again the CA seat. I suppose with a big enough hand cannon you can *maybe* get to the pilots, but it's not like you're shooting through tissue paper on either side of the door.

 

[Rushie]

You know, I get there isn't much respect for TSA, but why does everyone feel the need to insult us in rural areas?

I live in a podunk town. I don't feel insulted. Is that like rednecks not getting offended when you call them a redneck?

 

[midwestpa24]

I live in a podunk town. I don't feel insulted. Is that like rednecks not getting offended when you call them a redneck?

Depends on the context. In the context of this discussion, they make it seem like small towns and small airports don't matter and are insignificant. I love my community, and I love my airport. I'd wager if they ever visited our airport and saw how thriving our aviation community here is, they would be jealous.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

You are still wrong..... I never read the article at all. And you have not addressed the bulkhead either. There is no hardening other than the door. Just lightweight honeycomb structure behind the pilots.

No passenger dogpile required when a backpack full of TATP or HMTD turns the hull into a descending debris pile from 26k ft. Hate of TSA and ignorance of the bigger threat picture show just how ignorant people are and how soon they have forgotten history.

How about this... I would rather get blown the **** up at 26k feet than infringe on your constitutional rights. Freedom costs more than dead soldiers and higher taxes. By letting our way of life change for “safety” we concede victory to the enemy.

 

[Rushie]

Depends on the context. In the context of this discussion, they make it seem like small towns and small airports don't matter and are insignificant. I love my community, and I love my airport. I'd wager if they ever visited our airport and saw how thriving our aviation community here is, they would be jealous.

Point taken. In my defense I did say that money should be spent at said podunk town just on roads and not TSA, or for that matter it could be spent on the airport making improvements that would attract business and hence jobs. More jobs means less deaths from the effects of poverty and unemployment. No way did I mean to imply small towns and airports don't matter.

Edit: but if by "they" you mean the government then you might be right.

 

[midwestpa24]

Point taken. In my defense I did say that money should be spent at said podunk town just on roads and not TSA, or for that matter it could be spent on the airport making improvements that would attract business and hence jobs. More jobs means less deaths from the effects of poverty and unemployment. No way did I mean to imply small towns and airports don't matter.

Believe me, I'm not defending TSA. I work with them daily. Some of the stuff they come up with would be comical, if they weren't serious.

 

[paflyer]

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.

And by "scariest" that's what I meant. I'm a sitting duck.

 

[paflyer]

What?! Surely you jest!

Next you’ll tell us that they even clear Customs at little airports where the only thing keeping them in the airplane until the Customs agent comes out and provides personalized service is a stripe of yellow paint!

Say it isn’t so! Bizjets are coming for your children!

Where’s Scary Mary? She needs to issue a press release and do a news conference and the talk show circuit about this, immediately!

Don't encourage her.

 

[Ghery]

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.

Well, there is ONE advantage to the drones at TSA being federal employees. They are prohibited from striking. They all signed the same piece of paper I did when I went to work for uncle sugar in 1975. I will not strike, and if I do I will be fired on the spot. Same reason Reagan fired the PATCO controllers.

Other than that, it's a make work program for McDonalds rejects. They add nothing to the process that existed before 9/11, but add a tremendous cost to the taxpayers.

How many terrorists has TSA caught? They'll say that's classified. I call BS. If they caught one you know it would be all over the news. Look! We caught one!

 

[weilke]

I thought I had seen the bottom of the barrel in terms of TSA, and then I arrived at ATLs concourse E this afternoon.

 

[SkyDog58]

You know, I get there isn't much respect for TSA, but why does everyone feel the need to insult us in rural areas?

I grew up in a rural part of Indiana in the middle of cornfields, cow pastures, and some woods. The sort of place people would call the boonies or the sticks. The town I went to school in was rather small and more than qualifies as a podunk town. Those terms do not bother me, in fact I find them a bit endearing and I can often be heard saying I’d like to get back to the sticks or move to some small podunk town out near BFE.

Some day soon...

 

[denverpilot]

You know, I get there isn't much respect for TSA, but why does everyone feel the need to insult us in rural areas?

My whole family lives in podunk towns other than myself and my half sister in Houston, and we moved the hell out of Denver “the city” to rural land. I can’t think of a single family member who doesn’t describe the rural areas as podunk and BFE.

Do you live rural, or are you just “offended by proxy” for us? LOL.

Your username says Midwest PA. That’s petty rural but not as rural as out here. Regular Car Reviews on YouTube describes most of the places he visits there as podunk, too. It’s not exactly West Virginia.

 

[dmspilot]

Your username says Midwest PA. That’s petty rural but not as rural as out here. Regular Car Reviews on YouTube describes most of the places he visits there as podunk, too. It’s not exactly West Virginia.

Not that different, you know they share a border don't you?

 

[FlyingElvii]

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?

Not usually, but they are subject to random searches.

 

[FlyingElvii]

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

At MSP, commuter screening was in the commuter terminalbuilding, on the right side (looking from the garage to the main building). Exit on the ramp, walk into the building, and go through screening. That whole area is extended concourse now, torn down in 2001?

 

[denverpilot]

Not that different, you know they share a border don't you?

Uhh, yeah, but unless you’re well south of that border, you really aren’t in the boonies, podunk, or BFE.

Pittsburgh is right there on the western side of PA, for efffffs sake.

So to be “offended”by podunk, are we talkin’ an hour and a half on a major interstate away from massive civilization, or real rural, where its three or four hours to the town big enough to have a WalMart, all via two-lanes?

Like western Kansas or Western Nebraska rural, or what? West Virginia was just someplace close to PA for an example, but there’s a lot more rural than that.

Which rural dweller type of those two is “offended” by calling it “podunk”? Hahaha.

Midwestern PA is a lot closer to civilization than a whole bunch of places out West here.

As a card carrying member of a fly-over State with a strange anomaly of a bunch of idiots who ran into a mountain range and stopped, deciding California gold probably wasn’t worth freezing to death for... podunk is just fine by me. The more podunk, the better.

Only my wife really wants to stay close to the rat colony over there to our west. I could easily live without it and be a proud podunk dweller if they just had more airplanes and I went back to a 100% work from home IT job.

That whole having to drive into a warehouse to type instead of typing from here, and I dare say I have a better HVAC system here on the prairie than they do... it’s always too hot in my office there... is kinda worthless.

But they pay me to show up over there in the rat colony so I show up.

Look up Miller, SD. That’s where my family is originally from. That’s podunk.

The rest of that side of the family is so far out into south central Kansas farmland that the matriarch drives an hour to town to work in the only hair salon, part time.

Mom’s side homesteaded in South Park CO near modern day Fairplay.

Trust me when I say I have been around a lot of rural dwellers and nobody cares if you call it podunk. Only a city dweller or somebody who wants to be, would pretend to be offended by that. LOL.

Podunk is podunk. Hell, Denver is just an overgrown cow-town, barely big enough to be above podunk status.

Having two part time blueberries pretending to scan bags in podunk, still isn’t particularly useful, if we head back from our “offended by podunk” side trip into the original topic. Hahahaha.

It’s not even that useful in the cow-town. But we got a couple of nice perverts pictures in the paper after they targeted passengers to feel up and helped each other spot the hotties.

 

[denverpilot]

Hey, I found some really nice podunk.

Anyone have $13,000,000 you don’t need that you could just deposit in my account?

https://www.haydenoutdoors.com/land-for-sale/hidden-lakes-ranch

Only an hour from GJT airport, too.

 

[Unit74]

How about this... I would rather get blown the **** up at 26k feet than infringe on your constitutional rights. Freedom costs more than dead soldiers and higher taxes. By letting our way of life change for “safety” we concede victory to the enemy.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a very long time. You must hav stock in Reynolds Wrap tin foil.

 

[Unit74]

Give us a break. None of these podunk outstations have explosives detectors capable of catching TATP. You’re reaching pretty hard.

Then one guy who got TATP aboard an aircraft in small quantity was completely missed by TSA in a hub airport for chrissakes. It’s the last thing you want to use as an example of why we shouldn’t find the TSA utterly useless and expensive security theater.

If you have a backpack full of those, good luck making it to the airport in the car. A well placed speed bump would take care of that particular example.

Your lack of explosives knowledge is apparent.

 

[midwestpa24]

Your username says Midwest PA.

Its actually midwestPA24, I'm a Comanche driver.

Actually a resident of rural Iowa currently, although I grew up in rural Mississippi. Maybe I am a little sensitive about it. I just get tired of how the media and others sometimes portray rural America, especially the South, as some type of lower class.

Moving on...

 

[Rushie]

Its actually midwestPA24, I'm a Comanche driver.

Actually a resident of rural Iowa currently, although I grew up in rural Mississippi. Maybe I am a little sensitive about it. I just get tired of how the media and others sometimes portray rural America, especially the South, as some type of lower class.

Moving on...

I spent six years of my childhood in rural southeast Iowa near Ottumwa. Feasts of corn on the cob in the back yard. Good times.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Highly disagree. Take away security screenings and you would see terrorism incidents. Where there’s a will, there’s a way. I believe that one of the primary reasons for having such a good safety record in US Commercial aviation is due to the TSA and excellent crew training.

There is no good evidence that the TSA prevents terrorist attacks, and plenty of reasons to think they have little effect.

For example, it would be fairly easy to execute an attack on the long lines which the TSA creates pre-screening, yet this has not happened yet it the US.

And before people say “but there have been no attacks since 2001”, it turns out if you compute the frequency of attacks where non crew members deliberately destroy airliners departing US terminals before and after 2001, there is NO statistically significant difference in the frequency. It is a very rare event and you would have to wait about 50 years to be able to detect that difference.

The money and time spent on the TSA could be 100X more effectively spent on other safety measures if what one really cares about is saving lives. The TSA is about making people “feel” like something is being done - security theater - not about actual safety. It also serves as an 8 billion dollar public works program.

See http://realairlinesecurity.org for more information on this.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

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.

Screening with metal detectors began in 1973 and was run by the FAA. It was a delayed response to the increase in hijackings in the 60s (such hijackings peaked in 1969 actually so it is hard to see how even that program really helped).

Non-ticketed people could go through the detectors and proceed to the gate.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a very long time. You must hav stock in Reynolds Wrap tin foil.

Funny. I was thinking the same thing about what you said. Guess we will just have to disagree

 

[Unit74]

Funny. I was thinking the same thing about what you said. Guess we will just have to disagree

I recon so.... hope I'm not on your flights though..... Let's Roll!

 

[weilke]

Non-ticketed people could go through the detectors and proceed to the gate.

There is objectively no reason why that couldn't be the case today. As restrictive as TSA is with gate passes even for things like assisting an elderly passenger, it is clear that they don't exist to promote transportation security. Their only mission these days seems to be to make life for airline passengers as miserable as possible.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

There is objectively no reason why that couldn't be the case today.

Basically that is the recommendation of people like Bruce Schneier -- if we have to have government mandated screening, then return to pre-2001 system.

My thoughts are we would be better off with privatization and allowing the airlines to make these decisions in a market based way. The appropriate trade-off between security and convenience is not obvious and not necessarily the same for every airline/flight/airport. The market should decide. Of course, that would mean the airlines also have to be liable for all damages due to them operating their planes, including them being crashed - presently they are shielded from that. More at http://realairlinesecurity.org .

 

[weilke]

These days, single-airline terminals are uncommon. Most airports were reconfigured for joint checkpoints. Screening should be done by the respective airport authorities, just like it is done at SFO, MCI and the rural MT airports. No civil service rules imposed by the TSA, the agencies only role would be to set standards and to conduct frequent 'red team' testing of the airports/contractors. Every airport would have to post its score-card on how they did on the last 10 tests.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I recon so.... hope I'm not on your flights though..... Let's Roll!

How would you know if you were?

Even when I disagree with Internet screen names I figure the person behind it won’t really be that far away in their opinion. This is a terrible format for effect communication. Glad to see you understand that too

Edit: why would my opinion about a matter of public policy have any bearing on my ability to fly an aircraft? Are you just trying to make this personal?

 

[Rushie]

There is no good evidence that the TSA prevents terrorist attacks, and plenty of reasons to think they have little effect.

For example, it would be fairly easy to execute an attack on the long lines which the TSA creates pre-screening, yet this has not happened yet it the US.

And before people say “but there have been no attacks since 2001”, it turns out if you compute the frequency of attacks where non crew members deliberately destroy airliners departing US terminals before and after 2001, there is NO statistically significant difference in the frequency. It is a very rare event and you would have to wait about 50 years to be able to detect that difference.

The money and time spent on the TSA could be 100X more effectively spent on other safety measures if what one really cares about is saving lives. The TSA is about making people “feel” like something is being done - security theater - not about actual safety. It also serves as an 8 billion dollar public works program.

See http://realairlinesecurity.org for more information on this.

I don't know why people are so resistant to actual facts and reality. Here is truth in a nutshell.

 

[denverpilot]

Your lack of explosives knowledge is apparent.

Perhaps but it’s still not being caught by Barney Blueberry and wasn’t the only time it got on board an aircraft and the passengers stopped the idiot.

I’ll let you go throw a backpack of the stuff at your feet if you like. Go for it.

TSA is mostly useless expensive crap. It’s especially useless at tiny outstations that aren’t manned 24/7.

But again we all know this is just them pretending they need more money. That’s all that announcement is about anyway. Need more kickbacks for someone time to complain we can’t be effective with the billions already spent. It’s not about accountability for the loans already taken to pretend airports are secure.