Airport Security

swiftflo

swiftflo

Messages
1,336
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
Well the great day is nearly here. Tomorrow fly off to the Caribean to join a cruise ship (not Costa LOL) around 4 islands in the Caribean and then transatlantic to Tenerife and Southhampton.

The only down side is that we fly from East Midlands airport. Here we have to go through the "Jobsworthy" security. Every time we fly from there the "Jobsworthy's" empty my back pack, take my camera out of it's bag, take off the lens cap, look through the viewfinder and then wave a magic wand over the camera to see if there is explosives packed inside it. After this they inspect every one of our medications that are in a seperate bag inside the back pack.

We have passed through airports all over the world and never have to go through this at any other of them.

I appreciate that security in this day and age is needed, but EMA go to far.

Rant over !!!!
 
Why not write to the management of EMA and ask them why their security measures are so stringent?
 
Last edited:
:LOL:

Sorry, but I always laugh at people who refer to those who do their best to prevent someone blowing me out of the sky as a "jobsworth"
 
Simmotino said:
:LOL:

Sorry, but I always laugh at people who refer to those who do their best to prevent someone blowing me out of the sky as a "jobsworth"
Click to expand...

Me too ^^^^^^^^^ (y)

I've had to empty my bags, remove my boots etc. Whilst wearing RAF uniform, boarding an RAF Hercules as crew. This was in Stockholm :shrug:

If it stops only one air incident then it IS worth it.
 
what i fail to understand is the lack of standardisation (mind gone black and cannot think of the word I want...) across all UK airports....
 
Phil Young said:
Just as they look through the viewfinder shout out "EVERYBODY GET DOWN!!!" Swiftly followed by "sorry, I though I saw a wasp".
Click to expand...

But don't do that until you've got your defence brief sorted and arranged matters for your forthcoming arrest, trial and imprisonment.
 
Simmotino said:
:LOL:

Sorry, but I always laugh at people who refer to those who do their best to prevent someone blowing me out of the sky as a "jobsworth"
Click to expand...

As I said security is needed, but EMA go to far, never had a problem anywhere else with the back pack, Heathrow,Gatwick,Birmingham & Manchester never a problem. There is alway's the same articles in the back pack.

Wonder if it's because it's Black.LOL.

Should add we were stopped once at EMA because we had Cod Liver oil capsules in the bag and these were confiscated. So you can see what I mean about "Jobsworthy".
 
swiftflo said:
Well the great day is nearly here. Tomorrow fly off to the Caribean to join a cruise ship (not Costa LOL) around 4 islands in the Caribean and then transatlantic to Tenerife and Southhampton.

The only down side is that we fly from East Midlands airport. Here we have to go through the "Jobsworthy" security. Every time we fly from there the "Jobsworthy's" empty my back pack, take my camera out of it's bag, take off the lens cap, look through the viewfinder and then wave a magic wand over the camera to see if there is explosives packed inside it. After this they inspect every one of our medications that are in a seperate bag inside the back pack.

We have passed through airports all over the world and never have to go through this at any other of them.

I appreciate that security in this day and age is needed, but EMA go to far.

Rant over !!!!
Click to expand...

You have my sympathy, never had that in all my years of travelling.

Now mind and pack your sea-sickness pills ;)
 
May or may not be a valid point, but surely they can x-ray your kit bag? I worked at a private airport for a while, IMO the security was a joke :/
 
2 issues I have, it's the stupid questions they ask when checking in (do u really think I will admit to having a gun when u ask me) and the fact that pilots cannot take sharp objects in the air despite having an axe in the cockpit.

Oh, and a third, I cannot take tweezers on board but can take a duty free bottle on. Who would u rather face, a terrorist with a tweezer or one with a broken bottle?
 
cambsno said:
2 issues I have, it's the stupid questions they ask when checking in (do u really think I will admit to having a gun when u ask me) and the fact that pilots cannot take sharp objects in the air despite having an axe in the cockpit.

Oh, and a third, I cannot take tweezers on board but can take a duty free bottle on. Who would u rather face, a terrorist with a tweezer or one with a broken bottle?
Click to expand...

Oh don't get me started on the stupid questions... I was almost refused to fly at Norwich "International" Airport (KLM fly to Schippol occasionally) whilst trying to check in for a flight to Perth (Scotland)

"Has anyone put anything in your bag without you knowing about it?"
"erm.. that doesn't make sense.... how would I know, if I didn't know?"
"Are you being awkward?"
"Erm no. I am just questioning the logic of your question, because if I didn't know, how could I truthfully answer your question other than with "maybe" ?"
"That's it. I am calling security"
"Go ahead, please ask for one with more common sense and reasoning than you though..."

Enter meatheads from stage right..............
 
Lynton said:
what i fail to understand is the lack of standardisation (mind gone black and cannot think of the word I want...) across all UK airports....
Click to expand...

^^this^^

I flew to Egypt from Heathrow - whilst my shoes were in the X-ray scanner the lady operating it was just staring at the clock to her left. Then 20 minutes after passing through the main security scanners my wife realised she has a 1.5 litre, half drunk bottle of water in her bag! :bonk:

In contrast I flew to Edinburgh recently with hand luggage only and had to empty my bag out, prove the laptop worked, swab for explosives and drugs. :cautious:

I have no issue with everything being searched through, just wish it was a consistent approach.
 
Simmotino said:
:LOL:

Sorry, but I always laugh at people who refer to those who do their best to prevent someone blowing me out of the sky as a "jobsworth"
Click to expand...

trouble is they're not though - they just seem to think that making life most difficult, and shouting the loudest makes you safer rather then actually doing anything of value.

the example above is a good one of some pretty useless checks, same as the way no decision has yet been made if an iPad is a laptop or not........

a further example, shortly after 9/11 my ex and I travelled to the US. Despite all the unpleasant and pointless searches they never actually found, or asked about the legitimate insulin and syringes she was carrying (pretty openly, with a later from the doc in her pocket) :shrug:
 
boliston said:
How great is the actual risk of being "blown out of the sky" compared with the risk of being killed whilst driving to the airport?
Click to expand...

Low Risk. Because of this very much needed security.

I have to say the more detailed the search the happier i am. I would rather spend an extra 5 mins having my gear checked that them just let people on without looking.
 
asphotographymk said:
Low Risk. Because of this very much needed security.

I have to say the more detailed the search the happier i am. I would rather spend an extra 5 mins having my gear checked that them just let people on without looking.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you, but its not a consistent search across UK, EU and non-Eu airports. There's even differences between Heathrow and Gatwick and it does smack often of being farmed out to the lowest cost option, which if its an effective security option can't be right.

Although I suspect you're probably right it does indeed lower the risk, a far more effective approach is probably to of examined and profiled passengers (as I'm sure they do) before they ever leave for the airport
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
I would agree with you, but its not a consistent search across UK, EU and non-Eu airports. There's even differences between Heathrow and Gatwick and it does smack often of being farmed out to the lowest cost option, which if its an effective security option can't be right.

Although I suspect you're probably right it does indeed lower the risk, a far more effective approach is probably to of examined and profiled passengers (as I'm sure they do) before they ever leave for the airport
Click to expand...

I think the problem there has to be that some airports are not doing enough. I have been to other airports over the world where they have not even looked in a single bag and i can tell you that is not a safe feeling. For the sake of a few extra mins getting to the gate i am happy for them to search anything.... well maybe not anything.
 
asphotographymk said:
I think the problem there has to be that some airports are not doing enough. I have been to other airports over the world where they have not even looked in a single bag and i can tell you that is not a safe feeling. For the sake of a few extra mins getting to the gate i am happy for them to search anything.... well maybe not anything.
Click to expand...

I think so too, but I also can't help thinking that some more targeted searches would be good. I've also thought for a long time that letting a bomb of in a security queue would be as damaging (in lots of ways) as letting it off on a plane
 
I never understand why anyone gets frustrated at the security searches. Do they have such busy lives that 10 mins having bags checked is going to make that much difference to their day?

Even after they get through the security checks they still have a long wait to get on the plane, but do they chill? OH NO. Some of them get a seat as close to the departure gate as possible and sit there trying to second guess when they are going to call the flight. WTF, unless its that bunch of cowboys from ireland, the seats are more often than no allocated on check in so no matter when you get on board its still going to be there.

I hate being crammed into the damn things so the later I get on the better and guess what.. My seat is still waiting for me :)

I laugh my socks off when those who rush at the gate on the flight home only to get to the tarmac and find themselves loaded onto a transfer bus, first on last off so they end up at the back of the queue anyway.

So next time your getting ticked off by the security checks, think on, its a few more minutes of freedom before the airlines have you in their control ;-)
 
I fly pretty regularly (about twice a month) from Heathrow to various fabulous spots around Europe and I've never, ever had a security guard examine my cameras. So it's a valid point that some of you are raising about inconsistency - surely if cameras are a potential threat, then all airports should be examining them?
 
Hi...

I totally agree...no probs here...ive been thru a few stringent security checks...

Best story was that of my 65 yo mother...who never thought that a cutlery set counted as potential weapons when boarding the plane home from NY...but the best was yet to come...they explained that they couldnt let her take them on board...and took the (kind of blunt looking) knives for disposal...BUT LET HER KEEP THE FORKS...these look far more dangerous...!!!

STEVIER
 
swiftflo said:
Well the great day is nearly here. Tomorrow fly off to the Caribean to join a cruise ship (not Costa LOL) around 4 islands in the Caribean and then transatlantic to Tenerife and Southhampton.

The only down side is that we fly from East Midlands airport. Here we have to go through the "Jobsworthy" security. Every time we fly from there the "Jobsworthy's" empty my back pack, take my camera out of it's bag, take off the lens cap, look through the viewfinder and then wave a magic wand over the camera to see if there is explosives packed inside it. After this they inspect every one of our medications that are in a seperate bag inside the back pack.

We have passed through airports all over the world and never have to go through this at any other of them.

I appreciate that security in this day and age is needed, but EMA go to far.

Rant over !!!!
Click to expand...

really? I thought EMA were pretty lax tbh, but all in all the same as grotwick or heathrow, or any modern airport...
 
I would be scared if security looked in my camera bag.............a wedding 'tog with a canon 5dII............I would be escorted away.


(just kidding)
 
I went through security at LHR just over a week ago, they scanned my hand luggage which included my camera and lenses (as they do with all hand luggage) but didn't open it, and I got my knob fondled through my trousers by a bloke in uniform after the loops for the laces on my shoes triggered the metal detector. I could have done without the latter, tbh. Even if it marginally increased the risk of me getting on the plane, shock horror we're all going to die etc etc etc.

Infringments on personal liberty in the name of security need to be both necessary and proportionate. I am not convinced of the necessity of what happened to me.
 
you think thats bad, you try doing any work air side and taking tools/electronic equipment through the staff security channel.

had to do some work at a shop in gatwick departures once. cue a bag full of screwdrivers etc, cables, firewall kit, routers being litterally upturned all over their counter. yeah thanks for that.
 
Can't say I've ever had any real issues at EMA but I know where the OP is coming from.

How come there is none of the security stuff when you go an a train, ship, bus etc?
Travelling on international trains on the continent is a very pleasant experience compared to flying. Last time I went from Amsterdam to Zurich I boarded the train after zero hassles and was welcomed on board and wished a good morning. At the other end they even offered to get me a trolley as I had several large bags. When do you get that kind of service on a plane? That's coming from an aviation enthusiast of 20+ years.
 
swiftflo said:
The only down side is that we fly from East Midlands airport. Here we have to go through the "Jobsworthy" security. Every time we fly from there the "Jobsworthy's" empty my back pack, take my camera out of it's bag, take off the lens cap, look through the viewfinder and then wave a magic wand over the camera to see if there is explosives packed inside it. After this they inspect every one of our medications that are in a seperate bag inside the back pack.
Click to expand...

black boot polish round the rubber bit of the viewfinder, got to be worth a try ;)
 
onomatopoeia said:
I went through security at LHR just over a week ago, they scanned my hand luggage which included my camera and lenses (as they do with all hand luggage) but didn't open it, and I got my knob fondled through my trousers by a bloke in uniform after the loops for the laces on my shoes triggered the metal detector. I could have done without the latter, tbh. Even if it marginally increased the risk of me getting on the plane, shock horror we're all going to die etc etc etc.

Infringments on personal liberty in the name of security need to be both necessary and proportionate. I am not convinced of the necessity of what happened to me.
Click to expand...

Just for the record, there isn't enough metal in the loops for the laces on your shoes to set off a metal detector, they're set to detect the minimum amount of metal needed to make a firing gun.

As for everything else, it can depend which way your camera is facing going through an xray machine as to whether it gets selected for search or not, some angles can make the metal in it look more dense, which can of course mask anything which is behind it, so it will get selected for further inspection.

Once a bag is selected they are supposed to swab electronic items for traces of explosives, and other things.

On top of bags selected, security staff have to search a certain ratio of randomly picked bags and passengers as well.

Bottom line, they're looking 'mainly' for detonators, a little thing the size of a cigarette that most people wouldn't see on an xray even if it was pointed out to them, and anything else that can be used as a weapon.

Targetting can only work to a certain degree, what does a terrorist look like? And what does a person look like who's family is being held hostage and the man has been told that his family will be killed if he doesn't take this certain object and hide it on a plane for the next person to find and use to complete a jigsaw and bring a plane down?

I can fully appreciate it holds people up, not as much as being blown out of the sky though, or stabbed to death then flown into a tall building.

I used to operate an xray in he passenger search area at BHX by the way, so i'm not just speculating as most of the people that are 'inconvenienced' by 5 mins making sure they're as safe as they can be, are.

At the end of the day they're just there to do a job, to keep you safe, every airport security in the developed world is supposed to work to the same standards, ratios etc, obviously many don't, but if you walk through at some airports but get pulled at others it can be something as simple as your the 2nd out of every 5 that gets pulled to keep a ratio up.

And if you kick off, expect to be there a lot longer!
 
There's long been a perception amongst airline passengers that airport security is there just to bugger passengers about.
I was a policeman at heathrow, albeit before 9/11, and a regular passenger thought Heathrow, Soutampton and destinations from those.
Firstly the security questions. Yes, they are daft on the face of it, but like it or not that are mandatory for them to ask. The legislation is a result of PA103, so has been in force for a long time now.
Whats the point of them? Well, it's not to catch you if you are a terrorist, obviously, but it is there to stop mules (like a certain Irish Nurse at Heathrow), or so your bags can be screened if you have been daft enough to let someone pack for you or left your bag with someone who perhaps you shouldn't. In other words to catch the inadvertent carrier.

That should happen at check in, not at security unless you are one of the randomly selected or your bag shows something up that isn't right at the search area.

We were called an average about once an hour to the search area to people who'd been found with something that wasn't just not allowed on an aircraft, but would get you arrested if found in the streets. Examples being firearms, flick knives, tear gas/mace/pepper sprays. Explosives, ammunition and drugs.

Now some of that was pure stupidity (Usually drugs), or not thinking. OK, it may be a deactivated hand grenade (I jest not!), but are you going to argue if some clown takes it out mid Atlantic? Some Countries have armed Sky Marshal's on their flights, and they ain't going to think twice about killing you if they see most of the items I mentioned.

These are just the 'innocent' for want of a better expression carriers, ie they have no intention of using them.

These non thinkers, then, they are the 'lower' orders of society right? No, they are lawyers, Policemen, doctors, nurses, airline crews and just about any other sort of occupation or social group.

So once the twits are dealt with, then you have the terrorist, and the idea isn't necessarily to catch them, although it's better from Police point of view if they are caught, but to deter. Unfortunately, airline security is reactive, in that no one has any idea what a terrorist is going to do to conceal explosives next. Inconsistency is actually a way of deterring, you have no idea what they are going to look at, and therefore in theory at least, terrorists are deterred.

No matter what you think of in terms of concealment, someone will come up with a new idea you haven't thought of. So packing explosives into a camera might happen one day. On the other hand, building it into the lining of a bag might be someones bright idea, ok, it's been done, and a downed airline in that case was avoided by luck alone.

Lastly, in the case of the BAA, Security are directly employed by the Airport Authority, not the minimum wage guards you have in tescos. Although at one time they were very well paid, they aren't so much now. And while you may not like them, and I have a great deal of sympathy for that attitude, but for different reasons, remember they don't have discretion, they are tightly regulated. Any deviation from that results in them getting the sack. Faced with playing by the rules, or getting the elbow I doubt many of those complaining would act any differently.
 
Years ago I was in Goa over the New Year period and some of the fireworks they had would make the buildings shake, they really were more like small bombs.

One night at the bar one guy told me had bought some of these to take back home to Manchester...... Some people are just plain stupid!
 
I never have any issues with the levels of security when i fly, as already mentioned it is done to keep us all safe.

The one issue i do have is that most UK security do not seem interested in the job, or even being polite to the passengers. Yeah its a bit of a repetitive job for them. Surely being cheerful, polite and generally approachable would make their days more fulfilling and time could pass quicker.

Although i have not worked in this sector i did spend 10 years working with the general public and found that being cheerful with 'Joe Public' helped.
 
Mark Anthony said:
Just for the record, there isn't enough metal in the loops for the laces on your shoes to set off a metal detector, they're set to detect the minimum amount of metal needed to make a firing gun.
Click to expand...

Security bod on the gate said the trigger had come from my feet and it was probably the rings on my shoes as "that happens a lot", I took them off and they ran them through the xray machine that the hand luggage goes through to confirm.
 
Trigger comes from metal buddy, there's no way of telling when you walk through the metal detector whether it comes from your feet, head, or small intestine.

More than likely a metal support bar within the sole of the shoes, most shoes have them now, but i can assure you there isn't enough metal in shoe lace loops to set it off, maybe possible if you had other metal on you aswell, coins, watch etc and they could just tip it over the edge but nowhere near enough on their own.
 
"I never understand why anyone gets frustrated at the security searches. Do they have such busy lives that 10 mins having bags checked is going to make that much difference to their day?"

First off, its not just 10 mins, there is time spent waiting in the queue before hand as well.

Second, It really annoys me, when you have spent time packing your bag neatly so it contains everything you need, and then they go and pull it all apart, and then expect you to re-arange it all back in the bag within 10 secs. Yeah thanks.

Maybe its that they don't report on the news when they stop a terrorist from flying, but all of the arrested terrorists I know of are ones that have gotten through security, but are so stupid that then the explosives don't work, or it is dumb luck they are discovered.

Also these new full body scanner that were brought in from the trouser bomber. They don't work.

http://www.dailytech.com/New+Full+Body+Scanners+Cant+Detect+Liquid+Explosives+Properly+say+Experts/article17279.htm
"According to Ben Wallace, the UK Conservative MP, tests showed that the new scanners failed to detect a variety of low-density materials, including, plastic, chemicals and liquids. The waves pass through these materials, hitting the body and then bouncing back, revealing only the underlying skin."

I would prefer to have dogs at the airport, as from what Ive heard, they are more reliable.

I hear it a lot, and I have to agree.
Terrorism isn't about killing everyone, its about causing fear, panic and disrupting our everyday lives. Seems to me that those goals have been achieved.

I'm not anti security. I'm anti security that is non effective.

I know we have to be careful in today's world, but we shouldn't be making life anymore difficult for ourselves than it already is.
 
Last edited:
I've travelled by air a reasonable amount and more often than not have my hand luggage searched. Never has it taken more than 3 minutes, never have I felt violated and never have I felt inconvenienced.

I'd much sooner have potential risks investigated than find out later that something dangerous has come through.

You have to get to your flight with time to spare and it's not like there's a million and one exciting things to do in an airport so who cares if you spend 5 minutes waiting in line for security checks?

It does always surprise me that most foreign airports are less stringent than our own domestic checks. Paris is the exception of the airports I have travelled to, where I was actually patted down as well as having my baggage scanned. Again, I didn't feel violated and nor did it take more than a few seconds extra to pass through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top