TSA requesting comments on changes to foreign student security program

denverpilot

denverpilot

Tied Down
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
55,469
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
DenverPilot
Now's your chance to speak your mind on the whole thing... hahaha... or maybe not... depending on if your comment is "Just close it all down..." :)

Anyway... high on my list would be for TSA to do their own job, not use CFIs as part-time employees for checking documents, copying documents, filing documents, and maintaining long term storage of items with personal information on them, that can be stolen and used for various forms of fraud. Put that crap on the website, and store it there.

Additionally, once stored there, remove the requirement for every training facility to re-do all of it. The records online that whatever "stuff" TSA wanted to do, are already done...

You have until mid-June to make comments. Get 'er done.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2018/may/23/tsa-to-modify-alien-flight-student-program
 
Comments like "scrap the whole thing" and the like don't end up getting much consideration. They won't even address them in the rulemaking process.

Of course, this was all a knee-jerk reaction to the 9-11 guys getting flying lessons. It doesn't change the fact that the subsequent "terrorist" events involving airplanes were all done by US citizens who don't need such vetting and if the FBI and the in-place security systems had done what they were supposed to be doing at even at the time of 9-11, the fact they had gotten their training at a flight school rather than from MSFS would be moot.

By the way, the AOPA page is a typical one they put up when they don't give a rats ass but will jump in and take credit in the unlikely event someone else causes a positive change. A link to regulations.gov's home page? Jeez... what part of hypertext don't they understand. Here's the docket link:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=TSA-2004-19147-0369

Push the COMMENT NOW in the upper right when you're ready to type.

There's some onerous changes here that the AOPA glosses over in their attempt to do nothing. I'll be back as soon as I've had time to read the full file.
 
Last edited:
flyingron said:
Comments like "scrap the whole thing" and the like don't end up getting much consideration. They won't even address them in the rulemaking process.
Click to expand...

Of course not. And I didn’t recommend that at all.

I recommend much smarter commentary that will also be summarily dismissed. :) Spend at least two hours carefully writing it, too. Hahahaha.

But if one is bored, one can still say “scrap it”. It’ll give some bureaucrat something to read. Haha.

That’s up to the various commenters.

Would be fun if all NPRM comments had to be published, complete with cuss words and crazy though, wouldn’t it? Way more entertaining than Facebook. LOL.

Comment away. I am only the messenger that a comment period is open to address the mighty “security theater” Grand Entity.

The Great Oz shall take comments from the proles for a brief period of time, and deeply consider them as he sends them to File 13. :)
 
Probably wouldn't do any good to suggest the TSA not require trainees to knowingly falsify documentation to satisfy the Borg Mothership. :rolleyes:
 
Given that they've just taken the flight-plan filing for the DC FRZ back in-house and away from the contractor, this might be the appropriate time to argue that the vetting is a government function, not some CFI.
 
wsuffa said:
Given that they've just taken the flight-plan filing for the DC FRZ back in-house and away from the contractor, this might be the appropriate time to argue that the vetting is a government function, not some CFI.
Click to expand...

I’m strangely ok with making government bigger when it comes to them doing their own clerical job. Hahaha.

Of course it’ll cost me ten times what hiring any secretary and buying a filing cabinet would, but I do love creating good soul sucking gub’mint jobs filing paperwork. Hahaha.

Especially “security” paperwork.

It can only hope it motivates the good ones to escape sometimes. :)
 
Maybe my comment should be:

“Think about it. Do you really want ME in charge of your front line of defense against terrorists?”

LOL. They of course can look up that I’m heavily armed, and make the call. Hahahahaha.

I’m suuuuure any department in charge of “security” has access to this information. If they’d only look.

:) :) :)

“I’ll only shoot them with the small caliber stuff. Really!”

I kid. I kid. Well, kinda. Maybe. :)
 
Dump dump dump it.... security theater at its best, designed to look as if they were doing something.

I mentioned this before elsewhere but it does not stop...

1. A terrorist learning to fly in another country and coming to the USA
2. Learning from a ‘friend’ at some remote grass strip
3. Putting a gun to some ones head forcing them to fly
 
Some TSA guys actually agree with our point of view. Though they do advise us not to speak up against the silly program.
I told one flight-school TSA guy that if they think they are preventing people from flying airplanes into buildings, they won't be successful because if I had wanted to do so, I could have done it easily a thousand times.
His non-verbal eye expression of STFU was a clear indication that we're not supposed to tell the truth out loud. *shrug*

Go give them some feedback! :)
 
added the following comment:
--------------------------
The current program provides no recognized value, and was created in the aftermath of 9/11. and causes economic harm to not only the industry but law enforcement as well.
Here is how:
The industry must now use labor to capture and provide basic verification of the information provided. This labor has a cost. Further the record keeping requirements place an ongoing security cost to the industry. Considering the level of identity fraud in the country, it is only a matter of time before flight schools become targets for confidential data. In cyber security language, this is called an increase in the target surface area. Considering the number of flight schools in the country this is a considerable increase in surface area.
Once this data has been compromised, not only do the local and federal agencies spend resources and time addressing the criminal enterprise. The law enforcement agencies also now have to be concerned the data will be used for identity theft for not only financial reasons, but other concerns as well.

Therefore, the program if it needs to be kept should be redesigned to place the front line of authentication on DHS where the staff is trained; have the protocols and facilities to ensure the information remains secure. At which point, once of two possible simple solutions may be utilized to tell a CFI the student is authorized. One a web page, enter the passport number, country, and name as printed on the passport and receive a simple yes or no. Or add a specific stamp to the passport that the CFI can read.

Tim
 
Scrabo said:
3. Putting a gun to some ones head forcing them to fly
Click to expand...

Actually amazingly ineffective with former military pilots. Ok, you can kill me and have no pilot or you can force me to kill myself plus everyone. Seems like a bummer, but i will not let you win because we all die either way. Let's roll. Besides, everyone knows TSA will never allow a gun through the checpoints.

On topic, I vote for extreme vetting by the government. That must include records from their home country, a positive identity match and cooperation with their national and local law enforcement agencies in assessing them as a security risk. It is no more or less than what we have to do. If I can not provide government issued documents proving who I am and pass a background screening, I should not be flying.
 
I propose that I will never train another foreign student and to make the process more onerous.
 
N1120A said:
Here's my idea:

Fold up the TSA
Click to expand...

Kritchlow said:
So you propose zero security at airports?
Click to expand...

I remember some blow-hard congress-critter after 9-11 saying "You can't professionalize if you don't federalize" in support of forming what became the TSA (Thousands Standing Around). BS! A make-work project for MacDonald's rejects. TSA hasn't stopped a single terrorist in their history. How do I know? Because if they did the higher-ups would have it all over the news. "See? We caught one!". And they haven't done that.

Doing away with the TSA and returning to airport security as it was, with some changes to the rules (remember, box cutters were legal prior to 9-11, even TSA, had it existed, wouldn't have stopped the hijackers under the rules as they existed at the time) would be far more efficient, and probably less obnoxious than the federal make work program that exists today.
 
Ghery said:
I remember some blow-hard congress-critter after 9-11 saying "You can't professionalize if you don't federalize" in support of forming what became the TSA (Thousands Standing Around). BS! A make-work project for MacDonald's rejects. TSA hasn't stopped a single terrorist in their history. How do I know? Because if they did the higher-ups would have it all over the news. "See? We caught one!". And they haven't done that.

Doing away with the TSA and returning to airport security as it was, with some changes to the rules (remember, box cutters were legal prior to 9-11, even TSA, had it existed, wouldn't have stopped the hijackers under the rules as they existed at the time) would be far more efficient, and probably less obnoxious than the federal make work program that exists today.
Click to expand...

There was a lot of evidence that the rent a security which was supposed to follow a federal standard before 9/11 failed to meet the rather lax standards of the time.
Could there have been a "better" solution? Maybe, all I know is as much as I detest the TSA and think it largely is a boondoggle, there was no other proposed solution at the time which could have worked.

Tim
 
tspear said:
There was a lot of evidence that the rent a security which was supposed to follow a federal standard before 9/11 failed to meet the rather lax standards of the time.
Could there have been a "better" solution? Maybe, all I know is as much as I detest the TSA and think it largely is a boondoggle, there was no other proposed solution at the time which could have worked.

Tim
Click to expand...
Keep drinking that Kool aid.
 
tspear said:
There was a lot of evidence that the rent a security which was supposed to follow a federal standard before 9/11 failed to meet the rather lax standards of the time.
Could there have been a "better" solution? Maybe, all I know is as much as I detest the TSA and think it largely is a boondoggle, there was no other proposed solution at the time which could have worked.
Click to expand...

So? The threat to that style of hijacking was over at Flight 93. Once the passenger base knew hijackers were willing to die, no passenger will ever sit idly by and let them kill everyone ever again anyway. They’ll gouge the hijacker’s eyeballs out with a seat belt buckle if they have to.

Sue the snot out of any airline who’s rent a cops don’t perform and fail and they don’t have enough profit margin to survive it anyway. Problem would be solved very quickly without a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that ends right where it started with the same ineffective security.

But it has little to do with the TSA’s alien training program anyway, which is what the comment period is for. If TSA wants to get everyone getting flight training, fine, they just need to do their own work on it. It’s not the instructors’ job role to do it for them.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Keep drinking that Kool aid.
Click to expand...

What Koolaid? I worked ten miles from the five sided squirrel cage when the plane went in.
I am a news junky, and watched the debates on formation of the TSA and airport security. With airports owned by a mix of NGO, States, Municipalities, Federal Government, private companies, and NGOs which reported to a hodge podge of the above. There was no legal federal avenue to move forward quickly without federal staff.
The fundamental issue with the TSA, due to the fact that we cannot "profile" people and do not want to offend anyone, they are required to use blunt force and a sledge hammer approach. This leads to a very inefficient system.

Tim
 
denverpilot said:
So? The threat to that style of hijacking was over at Flight 93. Once the passenger base knew hijackers were willing to die, no passenger will ever sit idly by and let them kill everyone ever again anyway. They’ll gouge the hijacker’s eyeballs out with a seat belt buckle if they have to.

Sue the snot out of any airline who’s rent a cops don’t perform and fail and they don’t have enough profit margin to survive it anyway. Problem would be solved very quickly without a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that ends right where it started with the same ineffective security.

But it has little to do with the TSA’s alien training program anyway, which is what the comment period is for. If TSA wants to get everyone getting flight training, fine, they just need to do their own work on it. It’s not the instructors’ job role to do it for them.
Click to expand...

I agree on comment period. But disagree some on market aspect; it works, but works in a cycle. This has been proven repeatedly in many industries. At the time, and currently the belief is that as a society we are unwilling to accept the cyclic behavior where the bottom line controls our fate.

Tim
 
tspear said:
I agree on comment period. But disagree some on market aspect; it works, but works in a cycle. This has been proven repeatedly in many industries. At the time, and currently the belief is that as a society we are unwilling to accept the cyclic behavior where the bottom line controls our fate.
Click to expand...

Which cycle are you referring to? The cycle where security becomes lax until something happens and then everyone makes a big deal about it for a little while and then it becomes lax again? That’s normal. Don’t need to spend billions to fix that or even find it out. Everyone knows this happens.
 
denverpilot said:
Which cycle are you referring to? The cycle where security becomes lax until something happens and then everyone makes a big deal about it for a little while and then it becomes lax again? That’s normal. Don’t need to spend billions to fix that or even find it out. Everyone knows this happens.
Click to expand...

In a market driven solution, this is correct. In a government driven solution, you generally avoid the cycles through the use of heavy handed wasteful bureaucratic nonsense that is very inefficient (most often driven by obtuse laws and regulations that any sane person would not have written), but ultimately gets the job done.

Tim
 
Other than 911, the only terrorists to use aircraft in their attacks were Americans. Perhaps someone should point that out to the TSA. That's assuming any of them know how to read.
 
steingar said:
Other than 911, the only terrorists to use aircraft in their attacks were Americans. Perhaps someone should point that out to the TSA. That's assuming any of them know how to read.
Click to expand...

In their minds that would just mean they need ten billion more to vet... you. Not a reason to stop anything they’re currently doing. Government doesn’t get smaller.
 
DesertNomad said:
I'd be ok with that. I flew domestic flights in New Zealand in the 90s with zero security and lived.
Click to expand...
Zero security. As in any non passenger can walk from the street, up to the airplane, lean against the gear and have a sandwich? Or better yet, walk onto the airplane, sit in the cockpit and have a sandwich?
 
denverpilot said:
Airlines should have been responsible to secure their own businesses like everybody else. Get hijacked, get sued.
Click to expand...
And that’s fine. There would be some level of security. But how would individual airlines do that? Have 15 different security checkpoints? While that idea makes some sense, I don’t see how it could be implemented.
 
Kritchlow said:
And that’s fine. There would be some level of security. But how would individual airlines do that? Have 15 different security checkpoints? While that idea makes some sense, I don’t see how it could be implemented.
Click to expand...

If they can figure out the disaster of code shares I’m sure they can figure out how to share rental cops.

There’s just no business motivation to do so when the gub’mint is picking up the tab.

Not going to be able to get gub’mint out of that business now anyway. Way too much graft and corruption in those DHS contracts.
 
tspear said:
What Koolaid? I worked ten miles from the five sided squirrel cage when the plane went in.
I am a news junky, and watched the debates on formation of the TSA and airport security. With airports owned by a mix of NGO, States, Municipalities, Federal Government, private companies, and NGOs which reported to a hodge podge of the above. There was no legal federal avenue to move forward quickly without federal staff.
Click to expand...

If the Feds hadn’t done it, all those little dictators would have figured out how to secure their fiefdoms or lose business to the little dictators who did. Not that big a deal.

tspear said:
The fundamental issue with the TSA, due to the fact that we cannot "profile" people and do not want to offend anyone, they are required to use blunt force and a sledge hammer approach. This leads to a very inefficient system.
Click to expand...

Which was predictable and ends up in the same low quality problem you claim making it Federal “fixed”. Anything Federal becomes a politician’s wet dream for making up rules that never should have applied and using their vote to threaten to not give the massive loans needed to operate it, as their weapon of choice for their politics over meeting the original mission. Completely predictable.
 
Ghery said:
I remember some blow-hard congress-critter after 9-11 saying "You can't professionalize if you don't federalize" in support of forming what became the TSA (Thousands Standing Around). BS! A make-work project for MacDonald's rejects. TSA hasn't stopped a single terrorist in their history. How do I know? Because if they did the higher-ups would have it all over the news. "See? We caught one!". And they haven't done that....
Click to expand...
I agree that federalizing airport security may not have been necessary or beneficial, but I don't think the TSA or anybody else has any way of knowing whether TSA inspections have deterred terrorists from trying to get on airliners.
 
tspear said:
What Koolaid? I worked ten miles from the five sided squirrel cage when the plane went in.
I am a news junky, and watched the debates on formation of the TSA and airport security. With airports owned by a mix of NGO, States, Municipalities, Federal Government, private companies, and NGOs which reported to a hodge podge of the above. There was no legal federal avenue to move forward quickly without federal staff.
The fundamental issue with the TSA, due to the fact that we cannot "profile" people and do not want to offend anyone, they are required to use blunt force and a sledge hammer approach. This leads to a very inefficient system.

Tim
Click to expand...
Yeah all those civil rights getting in the way of security. That’s the problem. Thanks for clearing it up for me.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Yeah all those civil rights getting in the way of security. That’s the problem. Thanks for clearing it up for me.
Click to expand...

I am still not following. What koolaid did I swallow?
Just because I know why something was done, and the reasoning behind the choices made does not mean I agree with it.

Tim
 
tspear said:
I am still not following. What koolaid did I swallow?
Just because I know why something was done, and the reasoning behind the choices made does not mean I agree with it.

Tim
Click to expand...
Well... I guess I misunderstood your entire post. I thought you were of the opinion the TAA was a good thing.
 
Considering most terrorism in the US is committed by US citizens......
 
Palmpilot said:
I agree that federalizing airport security may not have been necessary or beneficial, but I don't think the TSA or anybody else has any way of knowing whether TSA inspections have deterred terrorists from trying to get on airliners.
Click to expand...
Every single test of the system has failed miserably. The shoe and underwear bombers were stopped by passengers. Every time the TSA has been challenged by an outside agency they've failed to stop the majority of prohibited items (read weapons) from getting on board aircraft.

Metal detectors (to keep unauthorized firearms off airliners) and strengthened cockpit doors are more than sufficient to keep another 911 style attack from succeeding. To be honest, passengers who understand the stakes and are able to man up and more than sufficient. Had anyone known what was coming down the pike they'd not have submitted to the hijackers in the first place. But we had always been told to let the authorities handle it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top