• What's ticked?
• Accolades
• Contact us

c o l u m n s

• Cheap Charlie
• ChrisCrossings
• Err Travel
• Leocha
• Travel Notes
• Archives

Security Breach
ChrisCrossings · March 1, 2001

Last week's column about security checkpoints drew an unusual number of responses. Most of them sided with my conclusion that airport security was lacking, but a few e-mails lambasted me - and last week's letter-writer, Norm Gilbert - for having a shortsighted view of airport safety. Here are a few of the reactions:

Q: I have been a Captain on B727, B737 and L1011 equipment for several different domestic and foreign air carriers. My aviation career spans 25 years. I have also been a police officer "on call" for consultation to a major US domestic airport.

Recently, you featured an article about laptops at security checkpoints that pointed out the fallacy of "security" at our domestic airports.

In point of fact - and most people would be absolutely appalled to hear this - security is an absolute joke. It's mostly window dressing. It is provided for public consumption only. Security experts know this and are loathe discussing the topic for fear the game will be found out.

I can, at around 2 a.m., get onto the ramp area of almost any airport in the United States. It simply involves cutting a hole in a chain link fence and walking to the ramp area. Contrary to popular belief, there are no roving bands of armed guards that patrol the perimeter of our airports.

There are no motion sensors. For the most part, there are no video cameras monitoring the exterior areas of the operations areas. I can, with a Mac, laser printer and 15 minutes of time, create a completely legitimate airline and/or airport ID.

Moreover, if I were intent on bringing down an airliner, I wouldn't even get on the airport property. The terrorist solution would be to sit a half-mile off the end of an airport, and wait until the first 747 flies over, subsequently launching any form of shoulder launched "Stinger" missile. Three days later, I repeat the action at airport the next airport, and two days later at the next.

Within one week, air traffic would come to a complete stop and the system would be in absolute chaos. What, or who could stop this? It would be close to impossible.

No, the "security" checkpoints at airports simply serve to keep the real "crazies" from causing immediate harm to the flying public. The reality is that a true terrorist intent on taking down an aircraft (or gaining access to same) is going to accomplish his task regardless of how many X-ray screening devices are in place, or what level of training the screens actually have.

Sorry to break the news, but that's life in the fast skies.

- Name Withheld

A: That's truly disturbing. I can only hope that airports will find and plug the security holes before something terrible happens. But I suspect that running 24-hour guards isn't always cost-effective. Nor, certainly, are improving other security measures. Is it really a question of how many people have to die before something is done?

Q: The Federal Aviation Administration has been working for several years on a new rule that will allow the agency to directly regulate the screening companies the airlines hire to perform security, and we expect this rule to become final in May.

The centerpiece of screening company certification rule is a new technology the FAA developed and is deploying called Threat Image Projection (TIP). TIP is software that runs on the airport X-rays. It projects at random realistic-looking images of all kinds of bombs, knives and guns into the X-ray images of real and fictitious bags as they go through the airport X-ray.

TIP tracks how well each screener detects these images so the companies and the FAA will know how well they are doing. Because they'll be getting constant practice in seeing what these dangerous objects look like in cluttered bags on the X-ray, screeners will in effect be undergoing constant training.

In addition, they'll have to stay alert because these images will come up throughout their shifts. In addition, companies can monitor how well each screener is doing and determine whether they need retraining in particular items or whether they need to be taken off the X-ray operator job.

TIP will also give the FAA objective data to judge how well each screening company is doing. The bottom line under the new rule will be that if a company's screeners aren't performing up to FAA detection standards, the FAA could revoke the company's FAA certification and they could no longer stay in business.

The FAA is in the process already of replacing every X-ray at every airport in the country with new state-of-the-art X-rays that will have TIP installed (that's a total of about 1,200 machines across the country).

You also suggest the screeners use outdated technology. In addition to the X-ray deployment, the FAA for the last few years has purchased and deployed all kinds of new advanced security equipment for the airports, including more than 600 trace explosive detection devices used for scanning carry-ons (like laptop computers) and 116 explosives detection systems for scanning checked bags (these are the million-dollar machines that use CAT-scan technology from the medical field to detect explosives).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a lot of things have changed in the past few years in terms of security. The new technology means we're doing a lot less hand searching of bags and we expect the new screener company certification rule combined with TIP to greatly improve screener performance.

-- Rebecca Trexler
FAA

A: Thank you for clarifying the FAA's position on security. I covered the new advanced security equipment in a previous column, but I neglected my journalistic duties by not checking with the FAA for the last story. I'm sorry about that.

Q: I enjoyed your article and agree with you with regards to airport security. It has been a pet peeve with me to turn on my computer - so I just don't.

I travel both domestic and international extensively and the trick that works for me with my laptop is: I put in a dead battery or remove it and place it in a different bag. My response to them is "the battery is dead." If they have issue, I offer to rescan the computer. Only once, in Paris, did security question me and give me a hard time. I asked to speak with a senior security official that was familiar with computers. They just motioned me through the line.

-- Robert Grass

A: I suppose that's one way of getting around the system.

Q: Perhaps you should have done a bit more research on your story about checkpoint security. Had you taken the time to really do some research, you would have realized that these "second-rate" security personnel are simply carrying out the policies and procedures outlined by the federal government.

These personnel do not write the policies and procedures, they simply carry them out.

I should also point out the security personnel do not like the procedures any better than the passengers do. Can you imagine being placed in a position where all you hear all day long from pompous people like Norm Gilbert and apparently yourself (based on the articles) is how stupid you are?

These people face nothing but abuse from people like you and many in the traveling public. Is it any wonder they try to stick together? The real ironic part of this is they are willing to accept - and do so daily - all of this abuse from the very people who they are protecting.

While I do not disagree with the fact they are minimum wage workers, this does not deter them from performing their duties at a very high rate of efficiency. Remember, this program was originally set up as an anti-hijacking program, not an anti-terrorist program. Perhaps people should consider how they would feel about not having these people working diligently for their safety.

Would you still feel as safe flying? The traveling public should really be thanking these people daily for the work they do. Many would be amazed at what they are actually preventing from occurring, including you.

So the next time you fly and feel like complaining about the requirements these people are following, remember you always have other options like Greyhound or Amtrak.

-- Dennis Fox

A: I can't dispute that the folks working the security checkpoints have a thankless job. I can't disagree that they've prevented a lot of dangerous items from getting on board. But I think you may have missed Gilbert's point, which is that the real criminals are smart enough to get around the system. Powering up a PC is unlikely to stop a terrorist.

Christopher Elliott's column appears on Thursdays. All e-mailed questions to ChrisCrossings become property of Ticked.com and may be edited, condensed or republished at the site's discretion. You may reach Elliott at chris@ticked.com. Or visit his home page at http://www.elliott.org.