TSA strikes again

Rather than flame on about the TSA, which I'm sure others will do for me, I'd like to point out that this is from a NASA ASRS form, which I think is an excellent use of this form!
 
Let me see if I've got this right; The overseeing all powerful security agency boards an aircraft and deliberately sabotages an emergency system? Interesting. Methinks they're working for the wrong side.

That's completely absolutely totally unacceptable.
 
One more reason not to fly commercial ... until THEY start doing this same sort of thing on GA aircraft.
 
ghayes said:
One more reason not to fly commercial ... until THEY start doing this same sort of thing on GA aircraft.
Click to expand...

Messing with what is essentially public use property is one thing. Messing with private property is quite another.

That'll be the point where the sabotour turns around and finds the aircrafts PO'd owner holding a tow bar well within swinging range and gets to answer some very impossible questions that don't have answers.
 
The airline should report the sabotage to the FBI, if they haven't already.
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
I wonder what their big rationale was for doing that "inspection" anyway?
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what movies they've been watching. One movie had a bunch o' snakes, another one with Steven Seagal had a gun hidden somewhere...


Trapper John
 
Trapper John said:
I guess it depends on what movies they've been watching. One movie had a bunch o' snakes, another one with Steven Seagal had a gun hidden somewhere...


Trapper John
Click to expand...

Well I hope they didn't harm any snakes if they found one. That'd be weird though, you're going down all May Day sitting in the lav and a snake drops out of the O2 door...
 
Last edited:
Dave Krall CFII said:
I wonder what their big rationale was for doing that "inspection" anyway?
Click to expand...

Probably their same rational for using temp probes and pito-static tubs as steps to climb up and peer into the cockpit of a regional a little while ago. Anyone remember that rocket science incident?
 
SkyHog said:
Yep. This is one of the best ways to fight the TSA. Report them as the terrorists they are.
Click to expand...

Another rationale for reporting it is that while the airline may suspect the TSA did it, they don't actually know. Let the FBI figure out that a fellow federal agency is violating the law against sabotaging aircraft.

If presidents are not above the law, then other federal employees aren't either.
 
F$%$*int TSA. Brains of a hamster. Collectively. They mistake the reflections off their shiny badges for the rays of God's benevolent smile.
 
Color me stupid this morning but:
We later discovered that a seal is not required and that the tsa in ZZZ had put it on. I questioned maintenance control and they were aware of it and allowed the plane to fly with this seal in place
Click to expand...
Suggests the airline maintainence people knew about it, even if the pilots didn't. While the TSA shouldn't disable safety equipment, that line indicates the airline knew about it but let it go.

What am I missing?
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Color me stupid this morning but:

Suggests the airline maintainence people knew about it, even if the pilots didn't. While the TSA shouldn't disable safety equipment, that line indicates the airline knew about it but let it go.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Remember the pitot incident in Chicago? The airline complained and the TSA fined them.

I agree, though, maintenance should have raised a stink, but I'd bet that the TSA threatened them if they said/did anything.
 
SkyHog said:
Yep. This is one of the best ways to fight the TSA. Report them as the terrorists they are.
Click to expand...
I wonder how it would go for one if they were to dial 911 and report that an airport was under the control of said terrorists (but using the word terrorist)...

Enjoy your trip to Cuba!
 
wsuffa said:
Remember the pitot incident in Chicago? The airline complained and the TSA fined them.

I agree, though, maintenance should have raised a stink, but I'd bet that the TSA threatened them if they said/did anything.
Click to expand...
Can somebody who's familiar with the law explain to me how it is legal for the TSA to damage private property? I suspect that is is, for some unimaginable reason, legal for them to damage aircraft. Just wondering where this authority comes from....
 
SkyHog said:
Yep. This is one of the best ways to fight the TSA. Report them as the terrorists they are.
Click to expand...

Well, now we know what "TSA" really stands for: Terrorists Sabotaging Aircraft.
 
sba55 said:
Can somebody who's familiar with the law explain to me how it is legal for the TSA to damage private property? I suspect that is is, for some unimaginable reason, legal for them to damage aircraft. Just wondering where this authority comes from....
Click to expand...

"Do you wanna fly today?"

They may not have the authorty to damage property, but they sure can make an airline (or crew, or passenger) miserable if you raise a stink about what they're doing or complain too loudly.

Frequent flyers understand the term "retaliatory secondary inspection".
 
wsuffa said:
"Do you wanna fly today?"

They may not have the authorty to damage property, but they sure can make an airline (or crew, or passenger) miserable if you raise a stink about what they're doing or complain too loudly.

Frequent flyers understand the term "retaliatory secondary inspection".
Click to expand...
Chicagoans understand "random" routine following incidents really well.

When the airline complained about the goof climbing on the instrumentation the TSA charged them with the security lapses.

What will happen is an explosive decompression incident with the NTSB maybe actually reporting years later that the TSA or U.S. Customs guy used his handy screwdriver... and nothing being done about it overtly.
 
wsuffa said:
"Do you wanna fly today?"

They may not have the authorty to damage property, but they sure can make an airline (or crew, or passenger) miserable if you raise a stink about what they're doing or complain too loudly.

Frequent flyers understand the term "retaliatory secondary inspection".
Click to expand...
Is it really that simple, though? I would imagine that there would be a lawsuit and some significant public outcry if the TSA damaged planes without some legal basis. Yes, they use intimidation tactics, but it seems like that might not be all that's involved here....

Btw., the TSA hosted a workshop at Oshkosh. They had put up about 40 chairs in front of this screen and presenter. I walked by there just for fun and couldn't help but laugh. They had the powerpoint presentation, a guy with a mic, and exactly one person in the audience. Serves them right.

-Felix
 
sba55 said:
Is it really that simple, though? I would imagine that there would be a lawsuit and some significant public outcry if the TSA damaged planes without some legal basis. Yes, they use intimidation tactics, but it seems like that might not be all that's involved here....
Click to expand...

TSA has - or thinks they have - the power to ground airplanes and keep airlines from operating.

Delta was unable to start airline service to two countries in Africa because the TSA refused to allow operations (based on alleged security risks).

Given that the TSA can take away operating authority, or make it so hard as to be impossible, they really do weild the bigger hammer. It is anything but "freedom"....
 
Make an announcement at the start of the flight that the forward (first class?) lavatory has been taken out of service by the TSA. The TSA also prohibits passengers from one class from utilizing the lavatories in another class, do they not? At every opportunity state that it is a TSA directive.
 
I just bought the full Beavis and Butthead Moronathon, and they would fit right in working at TSA rather than Burger World.....
 
gprellwitz said:
Make an announcement at the start of the flight that the forward (first class?) lavatory has been taken out of service by the TSA. The TSA also prohibits passengers from one class from utilizing the lavatories in another class, do they not? At every opportunity state that it is a TSA directive.
Click to expand...

Laugh if you want, but it doesn't take TSA to cause that. I was on an AA flight from IAD-LAX in March that had to make a "potty break" at ORD. It was a non-stop, but there was a problem with the front lav and they elected to take us to ORD to replace the toilet. Did the fuel-burn thing (10,000' with gear out for a couple of loops of Indiana), had the trucks roll for landing, and 2-1/2 hours later we were winging our way back to LAX. At least they didn't have to hand out rubber bands for the F cabin.
 
I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

--Benjamin Franklin, in his speech endorsing the proposed U.S. Constitution
 
RJM62 said:
I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

--Benjamin Franklin, in his speech endorsing the proposed U.S. Constitution
Click to expand...

I think I would have liked Ben had I been alive at the time :)
 
I wish I had known about the TSA forum. I would have shown up and told those pricks off just for the fun of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top