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

Hell I’d be more likely to fly.

Schiavo is nothing more than a shrill alarmist posing as an aviation expert. She has zero credibility in my book. Her bomb scare stunt at Columbus in 1999 should have put her in jail. I cannot fathom why she’s a quotable source for the media. But then many things they do and write baffles me.
 
^^^^ Agree! Schaivo is a sensationalist who CNN loves to have commenting.
 
Agree on Schiavo. Why/how do you think she got so popular? I can think of multiple better choices.
 
I’m gonna hear it for saying this, but I’m actually pro-TSA. With the way society and people are these days, I feel like we can’t afford to be without some type of security screening. Do I think that they’re over the top in many regards, absolutely. If we took them away completely, we would be opening up a door for sick minded people to enter commercial aircraft for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, society just isn’t the same as it was years ago.
 
Sure, give the next terrorists an entry point into the airspace system. Fly out of rinkydink airport to DFW, get on a triple 7 with your 50 lbs of explosive strapped to you. Blow up when drinks are served.

I don't think it's a good idea.....
 
Unit74 said:
Sure, give the next terrorists an entry point into the airspace system. Fly out of rinkydink airport to DFW, get on a triple 7 with your 50 lbs of explosive strapped to you. Blow up when drinks are served.

I don't think it's a good idea.....
Click to expand...
Concur.
 
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.
 
Ryanb said:
I’m gonna hear it for saying this, but I’m actually pro-TSA. With the way society and people are these days, I feel like we can’t afford to be without some type of security screening. Do I think that they’re over the top in many regards, absolutely. If we took them away completely, we would be opening up a door for sick minded people to enter commercial aircraft for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, society just isn’t the same as it was years ago.
Click to expand...

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.
 
LoLPilot said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Ryanb said:
I’m gonna hear it for saying this, but I’m actually pro-TSA. With the way society and people are these days, I feel like we can’t afford to be without some type of security screening. Do I think that they’re over the top in many regards, absolutely. If we took them away completely, we would be opening up a door for sick minded people to enter commercial aircraft for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, society just isn’t the same as it was years ago.
Click to expand...
Some type of security screening sure I’ll agree with that sentiment. You know just like the security screening we had before the TSA. TSA is no better than the old security but is way more expensive and ripe for constitutional abuse. It’s not like we didn’t have security before TSA
 
No TSA screening doesn't mean no security. I bet airlines would want to enforce some kind of security.

edit: Sorry Tarheelpilot you just said the same thing.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Some type of security screening sure I’ll agree with that sentiment. You know just like the security screening we had before the TSA. TSA is no better than the old security but is way more expensive and ripe for constitutional abuse. It’s not like we didn’t have security before TSA
Click to expand...
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.
 
Ryanb said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'd say metal detectors, sure. But even the people who are supposed to benefit from the program say it's a failure:

https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/03/opinions/abend-tsa-screening-failure/index.html

After I worked with them, the suggestions that my team made to the TSA went unheeded for the most part because a week after we presented our study they failed a major test where mock weapons got through checkpoints. They have, however, repeatedly stolen property and violated passengers. I once flew and had a bottle opener with a steel corkscrew on it that I had left in my backpack. I didn't realize that until after I was at my hotel at my destination. Meanwhile the nodule on my knee left over from football triggers the stupid body scanner each time so they are compelled to feel up and down my leg. I've just taken to telling them that only the first 10 seconds are free and after that I charge $25 for every ten minutes.
 
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.
 
Plus numerous airports have fighters on alert now. They stood down after the Cold War ended, but wouldn't have made a difference anyway as far as the towers, although MA ANG may have been able to intercept them in time. Flight deck crews may be locked and loaded too....you feel lucky Mr Terrorist? ;)
 
Last edited:
Rushie said:
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.
Click to expand...

A very popular theory and one that I subscribe to.

For those who never had the opportunity to access a commercial jet cockpit before and after the doors were hardened, the difference it great. There is no comparison.

And yes, the mentality of the flying public has had a major paradigm shift from the days before 9/11 when conventional wisdom was just to remain calm during a hijacking and you'd eventually be released. Now, all bets are off.

Then the Federal Flight Deck Officer program has to have a deterrent effect as well. You never know as a potential bad actor if the crew is armed or not.

All of these have a far larger impact than the TSA checkpoints which really are an inefficient expensive hot mess.
 
Unit74 said:
Sure, give the next terrorists an entry point into the airspace system. Fly out of rinkydink airport to DFW, get on a triple 7 with your 50 lbs of explosive strapped to you. Blow up when drinks are served.

I don't think it's a good idea.....
Click to expand...

Addressed in literally the second sentence in the article:

Passengers would instead be screened when they arrived at larger airports after their initial flight.
Click to expand...
 
Ryanb said:
I’m gonna hear it for saying this, but I’m actually pro-TSA. With the way society and people are these days, I feel like we can’t afford to be without some type of security screening. Do I think that they’re over the top in many regards, absolutely. If we took them away completely, we would be opening up a door for sick minded people to enter commercial aircraft for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, society just isn’t the same as it was years ago.
Click to expand...

Looks like TSA isn’t gonna be able to do much, unless you’re trying to smuggle too much shampoo in your carryon. https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/man-tries-to-steal-plane.112690/
 
Unit74 said:
Sure, give the next terrorists an entry point into the airspace system. Fly out of rinkydink airport to DFW, get on a triple 7 with your 50 lbs of explosive strapped to you. Blow up when drinks are served.

I don't think it's a good idea.....
Click to expand...

Before anyone can board a flight at a larger airport a passenger from a smaller, non-screened airport will be subjected to the full TSA groping and such at the bigger facility, before boarding that Triple 7 with a pocket full of kryptonite. ;)
 
Ryanb said:
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.
Click to expand...

You forgot the ;) and :) because you seem way to smart to be serious. You think TSA is the reason we’re safe? How many American airliners came from together due to terrorist activities in the US in the history of flight? And now TSA is preventing it on a daily basis? TSA is preventing people from staying hydrated by confiscating sealed bottles of water at their gestapo checkpoints. Airline crew training, I’ll give you credit for that one, but the TSA gets zero credit. They regularly fail their own internal audits.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
That was never the case.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Lachlan said:
You think TSA is the reason we’re safe?
Click to expand...
I contribute it, yes.

I’m not saying that I praise TSA for everything they do, because I think a good portion of their practices are asinine, but I do feel that we need them to remain in place for the overall safety of commercial aviation going forward.
 
Ryanb said:
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.
Click to expand...
Who cares if you can get to the gate without a ticket. Perhaps if drivers licenses weren’t handed out like candy having one would mean something. Medal detectors for people and a bag screening is more than sufficient for access to the terminal. There’s nothing magical about the TSA running the program. I didn’t start traveling on airlines regularly until 20 years ago and then medal detectors were everywhere and most places screened bags as well. Furthermore there wasn’t a security failure at the airport on 9-11. They terrorists took advantage of how crews were trained to use the planes as weapons. There never was nor will there ever be a legitimate need for the TSA. Changes in crew training, procedures and a more uniform standard for screening requirements at air carrier airports would have been more than sufficient. About all the TSA did was make people without sufficient knowledge feel better and we lost a lot of constitutional protections in the process. So I really don’t know what you’re talking about. Seems to me you don’t fulky understand how far reaching the legislation was that created the DHS/TSA for a very small increase in actual protection that could have been accomplished far cheaper in the private sector without any of the government over reach.
 
Ryanb said:
Highly disagree. Take away security screenings and you would see terrorism incidents.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ryanb said:
I’m gonna hear it for saying this, but I’m actually pro-TSA. With the way society and people are these days, I feel like we can’t afford to be without some type of security screening. Do I think that they’re over the top in many regards, absolutely. If we took them away completely, we would be opening up a door for sick minded people to enter commercial aircraft for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, society just isn’t the same as it was years ago.
Click to expand...


Except they went security, they are security theatre

Glad you’re enjoying the show at least
 
Unit74 said:
Sure, give the next terrorists an entry point into the airspace system. Fly out of rinkydink airport to DFW, get on a triple 7 with your 50 lbs of explosive strapped to you. Blow up when drinks are served.

I don't think it's a good idea.....
Click to expand...

You haven't read the articles I gather.
 
Most of the small EAS airports around here have part time TSA staff who I wouldn’t trust to find a hole in their sock.

Their “security” equipment sits unguarded and tamper-able 22 hours a day in empty terminals without cameras, certainly nobody watching them if there are any cameras, and rarely anyone present at all.

Hop behind the ticket counter if you like. Nobody’s here.

The security gear certainly isn’t up to the standards of the gear seen at large airports where someone sold their political buddy from their alma matter on some nice five million dollar each millimeter wave scanners.

Deserted and unguarded is the best word for most of them 22 hours of every day with the terminal doors on the public side wide open.

You could walk into any of those small airports and do whatever you wanted in there for hours.
 
ZeroPapaGolf said:
Addressed in literally the second sentence in the article:
Click to expand...
Which would just bog things down and make connections absolutely f’ng miserable.

Can you imagine leaving from podunk regional on an RJ and having to then go through the TSA NTACs at ATL?

Seriously, who thinks up this crap?
 
Fearless Tower said:
Which would just bog things down and make connections absolutely f’ng miserable.

Can you imagine leaving from podunk regional on an RJ and having to then go through the TSA NTACs at ATL?

Seriously, who thinks up this crap?
Click to expand...

Time to rethink hub and spoke?

Just send the RJs direct and avoid the craptacular hubs altogether?
 
denverpilot said:
Time to rethink hub and spoke?

Just send the RJs direct and avoid the craptacular hubs altogether?
Click to expand...
Except that Regionals exist because of Hub and Spoke. No regional carrier (whether independent or wholly owned) could exist without subsidies from a Major.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Except that Regionals exist because of Hub and Spoke. No regional carrier (whether independent or wholly owned) could exist without subsidies from a Major.
Click to expand...

So far. I’m not saying that they’re that smart, but they’re now starting to merge into much larger companies and flying bigger aircraft.

The way you really know they’re cutting loose is when they build their own ticketing systems and integrate those for code shares instead of using the main line systems. That’ll be the canary in the coal mine on them doing their own things.

They can’t get slots at most of the busiest hubs, but with the right business savvy they can fly around them.
 
weilke said:
You haven't read the articles I gather.
Click to expand...

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....
 
denverpilot said:
Most of the small EAS airports around here have part time TSA staff who I wouldn’t trust to find a hole in their sock.

Their “security” equipment sits unguarded and tamper-able 22 hours a day in empty terminals without cameras, certainly nobody watching them if there are any cameras, and rarely anyone present at all.

Hop behind the ticket counter if you like. Nobody’s here.

The security gear certainly isn’t up to the standards of the gear seen at large airports where someone sold their political buddy from their alma matter on some nice five million dollar each millimeter wave scanners.

Deserted and unguarded is the best word for most of them 22 hours of every day with the terminal doors on the public side wide open.

You could walk into any of those small airports and do whatever you wanted in there for hours.
Click to expand...

We are one of those EAS communities. I can't speak to any particular one you have seen, but all of our equipment is kept secure in the checkpoint. The checkpoint is locked anytime it is not in use.

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.

At the end of the day, its a non story. It was an internal report that was conducted just to look for cost cutting measures. They do this every budget cycle. Not new, not news...which should be CNN's tagline.
 
midwestpa24 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Exactly. One look at the current TSA Precheck line at ATL alone should make it pretty obvious this is a bad idea.
 
denverpilot said:
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
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t object. As I mentioned above, it doesn’t have to be the TSA, but I’m all for some level of security screening, I don’t care who runs it.

Point is, that having some type of screening system in place is a deterrent against ill-minded people. Take it away and you’re setting the industry up for harm. If you disagree than you must have a lot more trust in the general public than I do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top