4 ms·

I think they're concern is not foremost for the safety of the passengers. The main concern is airplanes going into buildings. Of course, this is definitely an e

I think they're concern is not foremost for the safety of the passengers. The main concern is airplanes going into buildings. Of course, this is definitely an example of fighting the last war. On a separate note, the TSA really pisses me off. Consider that UPS saves millions by not taking left turns. Removing or adding very small inefficiencies at a very large scale has tremendous cost implications. I don't think these security lines add much security and I think they do that task at a much higher cost than most people think.

digi_owl 11y ago
IF you look at airport security, it is always about fighting the last war. The limitation on liquids comes a lone bomber bringing a liquid binary explosive onboard in the toiletry. the issue with shoes, again another bomber. matching luggage to passengers i believe is because of Lockerbie. And the list goes on and on.
- mikeash 11y ago
  If you're in a position to make these decisions, your career will be wrecked if an attack is repeated successfully, but you'll probably be just fine if a new attack gets through.
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    Sounds somewhat like a inverse Lucas Critique...
MBlume 11y ago
I agree that planes going into buildings is the major security concern, but we fixed it. We've reinforced the cockpit doors and we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers (the latter we managed within hours of the first attack)
- UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
  Plus panic buttons & guns in the cockpit, new procedures for aircraft leaving their scheduled route, and passenger's reaction to a hijacking (e.g. one "bad guy" with a switchblade is nothing against 300 people who fear NOT doing anything will endanger their lives).
  - tdfw 11y ago
    Pilots have a panic button. It's called squawking code 7500. Alerts ATC that there is a hijacking situation (7700 is general emergency.) Guns in airplanes are a bad idea for, well, quite a few reasons.
- vidarh 11y ago
  > we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers Have we? Maybe US passengers have been taught that better than elsewhere, but we don't really know due to the lack of hijackings to test that theory. And internationally, of about a dozen hijackings post 9/11 only two I think have seen the hijacker get subdued by passengers - in one instance probably because there happened to be six police officers aboard; in the other instance it was a lone hijacker with a nail file... Incidentally, despite 9/11, the odds of surviving a plane hijacking are still very high - the persons running the highest risk of getting killed in a hijacking are the hijackers. As it happens, 9/11 did not result in a string of copycat hijackers - most hijackers appears to still plan to survive the hijacking.
- lojack 11y ago
  While all of this helps, it's hard to say that it fixed the issue. As far as I'm aware, for US based flights, there have been a few bombing attempts, but no hijacking attempt since 9/11. It's hard to say if this is a result of these security measures, the TSA security, or just the fact that hijackings aren't that common.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  ...we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers Since I'm old, I remember the decades during which we were taught to cooperate completely with hijackers. Of course this was always bad advice, as was eventually made clear even to the idiots on TV. It seems possible that if no terrorism "expert" had ever appeared on TV, 9/11 could have gone very differently.
rayiner 11y ago
It's not like we didn't have airport security lines before the TSA. And with the new millimeter wave machines I'm not sure if they're appreciably slower than the old metal detector setup. The bottleneck was always putting your luggage through the X-ray, and we've had that for as long as I can remember.
- Thriptic 11y ago
  I don't have the data to back it up, but from what I have personally seen, the bottleneck is now predominantly the body scanner, mostly because many airports are running a setup where they have two x-ray baggage detector lines feeding into one body scanner.
  - rhino369 11y ago
    The bottleneck is definitely the xray scanners. I've never seen the line be held up by people waiting for millimeter wave machine. Also, if that line gets even a little long, the TSA agent will wave people through the metal detector real quick. That said, things like taking your shoes off, taking your laptop out, removing belts, etc. really slow down the xray machine line.
    - Thriptic 11y ago
      To be fair my observations are solely based off n~= 20 flights through generally smaller airports, but I have seen extreme reluctance on the part of TSA staff to pass people through the metal detectors, especially during times like holidays. I do agree that the security theater surrounding the x-ray bag scanners is also a significant issue and might be the primary bottleneck at other airports or at different times.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  When I was flying in continental USA on a weekly basis in 1998-99, security lines were seldom a problem. On more than one occasion, I parked my car in the DIA short-term lot (client was paying) 20 minutes before flight time. Gate agents would wag their fingers, and I'd be breathing hard when I got aboard, but I never missed a plane because of it. Also when I forgot to stash my pocketknife in my carry-on bag I just plunked it down in the change bucket with my keys and change. It really was easier and more enjoyable to fly back then...

digi_owl 11y ago

IF you look at airport security, it is always about fighting the last war. The limitation on liquids comes a lone bomber bringing a liquid binary explosive onboard in the toiletry. the issue with shoes, again another bomber. matching luggage to passengers i believe is because of Lockerbie. And the list goes on and on.

mikeash 11y ago
If you're in a position to make these decisions, your career will be wrecked if an attack is repeated successfully, but you'll probably be just fine if a new attack gets through.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Sounds somewhat like a inverse Lucas Critique...

MBlume 11y ago

I agree that planes going into buildings is the major security concern, but we fixed it. We've reinforced the cockpit doors and we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers (the latter we managed within hours of the first attack)

UnoriginalGuy 11y ago
Plus panic buttons & guns in the cockpit, new procedures for aircraft leaving their scheduled route, and passenger's reaction to a hijacking (e.g. one "bad guy" with a switchblade is nothing against 300 people who fear NOT doing anything will endanger their lives).
- tdfw 11y ago
  Pilots have a panic button. It's called squawking code 7500. Alerts ATC that there is a hijacking situation (7700 is general emergency.) Guns in airplanes are a bad idea for, well, quite a few reasons.
vidarh 11y ago
> we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers Have we? Maybe US passengers have been taught that better than elsewhere, but we don't really know due to the lack of hijackings to test that theory. And internationally, of about a dozen hijackings post 9/11 only two I think have seen the hijacker get subdued by passengers - in one instance probably because there happened to be six police officers aboard; in the other instance it was a lone hijacker with a nail file... Incidentally, despite 9/11, the odds of surviving a plane hijacking are still very high - the persons running the highest risk of getting killed in a hijacking are the hijackers. As it happens, 9/11 did not result in a string of copycat hijackers - most hijackers appears to still plan to survive the hijacking.
lojack 11y ago
While all of this helps, it's hard to say that it fixed the issue. As far as I'm aware, for US based flights, there have been a few bombing attempts, but no hijacking attempt since 9/11. It's hard to say if this is a result of these security measures, the TSA security, or just the fact that hijackings aren't that common.
jessaustin 11y ago
...we've taught passengers not to cooperate with hijackers Since I'm old, I remember the decades during which we were taught to cooperate completely with hijackers. Of course this was always bad advice, as was eventually made clear even to the idiots on TV. It seems possible that if no terrorism "expert" had ever appeared on TV, 9/11 could have gone very differently.

rayiner 11y ago

It's not like we didn't have airport security lines before the TSA. And with the new millimeter wave machines I'm not sure if they're appreciably slower than the old metal detector setup. The bottleneck was always putting your luggage through the X-ray, and we've had that for as long as I can remember.

Thriptic 11y ago
I don't have the data to back it up, but from what I have personally seen, the bottleneck is now predominantly the body scanner, mostly because many airports are running a setup where they have two x-ray baggage detector lines feeding into one body scanner.
- rhino369 11y ago
  The bottleneck is definitely the xray scanners. I've never seen the line be held up by people waiting for millimeter wave machine. Also, if that line gets even a little long, the TSA agent will wave people through the metal detector real quick. That said, things like taking your shoes off, taking your laptop out, removing belts, etc. really slow down the xray machine line.
  - Thriptic 11y ago
    To be fair my observations are solely based off n~= 20 flights through generally smaller airports, but I have seen extreme reluctance on the part of TSA staff to pass people through the metal detectors, especially during times like holidays. I do agree that the security theater surrounding the x-ray bag scanners is also a significant issue and might be the primary bottleneck at other airports or at different times.
jessaustin 11y ago
When I was flying in continental USA on a weekly basis in 1998-99, security lines were seldom a problem. On more than one occasion, I parked my car in the DIA short-term lot (client was paying) 20 minutes before flight time. Gate agents would wag their fingers, and I'd be breathing hard when I got aboard, but I never missed a plane because of it. Also when I forgot to stash my pocketknife in my carry-on bag I just plunked it down in the change bucket with my keys and change. It really was easier and more enjoyable to fly back then...