Security ??
09-11-2006, 12:42 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: B767A[ret.]
Posts: 593
Security ??
Editorial
A Ban on Carry-On Luggage
Published: September 10, 2006
In a directive whose logic is not always apparent, the Transportation Security Administration has spelled out what airline passengers can carry on board with them, what must be placed in checked luggage, and what can’t go on the plane at all. Knives must be checked but knitting needles and corkscrews are allowed in the cabin. Up to four ounces of eye drops can be carried aboard, with fingers crossed that multiple terrorists won’t combine their allotments to exceed the limit. Laptops, digital cameras, mobile phones and other electronic devices are permitted, so never mind any warnings you’ve heard that they could be used to trigger a bomb. The bomb ingredients themselves, notably liquid explosives, will be kept out of the cabin by a ban on liquids, gels and lotions, except for small amounts of baby formula and medications.
The ban on liquids surely makes sense given the lack of a reliable, efficient way to detect liquid explosives on the passenger screening line. But the other fine distinctions in this directive make us think the best approach would be a ban on virtually all carry-on items, or at least a limit of one small personal bag per passenger to tote travel documents, keys, vital medications, reading materials and any other minimal items that are allowed.
There’s a lot to be said for a drastic reduction in what can be carried aboard. Passenger security lines would move faster if there were little or nothing for the screeners to screen. Passengers could be boarded faster and more comfortably if they weren’t clogging the aisles while stuffing bags in the overhead bins. Most important, security would probably be enhanced. If a terrorist somehow slipped onto your flight, he wouldn’t have bomb materials with him, or much of anything else for that matter. And his bags would get tougher scrutiny because the machines that screen checked luggage are said to be better at detecting explosives and other dangerous materials than the metal detectors and X-ray machines used for screening passengers and their carry-on bags.
The chief downside, from a security standpoint, is that a greater burden would be placed on the lines that screen checked baggage, which in some airports are already overstretched. That raises the risk that screeners will rush checked bags through with inadequate scrutiny of the images of their contents, or that bags will back up and flights will be delayed to wait for them to be loaded. Still, that should not be a problem beyond the ingenuity of aviation planners. The handful of airports that already have big explosive-detection machines integrated into their baggage conveyor systems ought to be able to handle the load easily.
When we raised the possibility of a ban on most carry-on items a month ago, there was a chorus of complaints from travelers who count on using their laptops during the flight; or fear that valuable electronic devices might be lost, broken or stolen if checked; or resent long waits after a flight to get their checked bags. Some travelers have already shifted to trains or automobiles for short trips and more will do so if the inconvenience mounts. These are not trivial issues. Airlines, already financially strapped, depend on business fliers who are the most likely to object to a change in the rules.
Airlines could head off some of these problems by, for example, storing valuable electronic devices in locked overhead bins where they can’t easily be stolen, and hiring more baggage handlers to unload planes rapidly. Separating people from their laptops during flights would be painful, although some people could surely use the time to go over reading material, or even revert to pen and paper.
A ban on most carry-on items need not be permanent. Technologies that could screen passengers and their carry-on bags rapidly to detect known dangerous materials are under development, but it is uncertain when they might be ready. Even then, sophisticated terrorists will always look for new tactics to evade detection. For now, the surest way to keep dangerous materials out of the cabin is to keep virtually all materials out of the cabin.
Home
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
A Ban on Carry-On Luggage
Published: September 10, 2006
In a directive whose logic is not always apparent, the Transportation Security Administration has spelled out what airline passengers can carry on board with them, what must be placed in checked luggage, and what can’t go on the plane at all. Knives must be checked but knitting needles and corkscrews are allowed in the cabin. Up to four ounces of eye drops can be carried aboard, with fingers crossed that multiple terrorists won’t combine their allotments to exceed the limit. Laptops, digital cameras, mobile phones and other electronic devices are permitted, so never mind any warnings you’ve heard that they could be used to trigger a bomb. The bomb ingredients themselves, notably liquid explosives, will be kept out of the cabin by a ban on liquids, gels and lotions, except for small amounts of baby formula and medications.
The ban on liquids surely makes sense given the lack of a reliable, efficient way to detect liquid explosives on the passenger screening line. But the other fine distinctions in this directive make us think the best approach would be a ban on virtually all carry-on items, or at least a limit of one small personal bag per passenger to tote travel documents, keys, vital medications, reading materials and any other minimal items that are allowed.
There’s a lot to be said for a drastic reduction in what can be carried aboard. Passenger security lines would move faster if there were little or nothing for the screeners to screen. Passengers could be boarded faster and more comfortably if they weren’t clogging the aisles while stuffing bags in the overhead bins. Most important, security would probably be enhanced. If a terrorist somehow slipped onto your flight, he wouldn’t have bomb materials with him, or much of anything else for that matter. And his bags would get tougher scrutiny because the machines that screen checked luggage are said to be better at detecting explosives and other dangerous materials than the metal detectors and X-ray machines used for screening passengers and their carry-on bags.
The chief downside, from a security standpoint, is that a greater burden would be placed on the lines that screen checked baggage, which in some airports are already overstretched. That raises the risk that screeners will rush checked bags through with inadequate scrutiny of the images of their contents, or that bags will back up and flights will be delayed to wait for them to be loaded. Still, that should not be a problem beyond the ingenuity of aviation planners. The handful of airports that already have big explosive-detection machines integrated into their baggage conveyor systems ought to be able to handle the load easily.
When we raised the possibility of a ban on most carry-on items a month ago, there was a chorus of complaints from travelers who count on using their laptops during the flight; or fear that valuable electronic devices might be lost, broken or stolen if checked; or resent long waits after a flight to get their checked bags. Some travelers have already shifted to trains or automobiles for short trips and more will do so if the inconvenience mounts. These are not trivial issues. Airlines, already financially strapped, depend on business fliers who are the most likely to object to a change in the rules.
Airlines could head off some of these problems by, for example, storing valuable electronic devices in locked overhead bins where they can’t easily be stolen, and hiring more baggage handlers to unload planes rapidly. Separating people from their laptops during flights would be painful, although some people could surely use the time to go over reading material, or even revert to pen and paper.
A ban on most carry-on items need not be permanent. Technologies that could screen passengers and their carry-on bags rapidly to detect known dangerous materials are under development, but it is uncertain when they might be ready. Even then, sophisticated terrorists will always look for new tactics to evade detection. For now, the surest way to keep dangerous materials out of the cabin is to keep virtually all materials out of the cabin.
Home
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
FlyerJosh
Hangar Talk
2
08-23-2006 11:42 AM
