6 ms·

I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while w

I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Today if my destination is with in a 10hr drive from me, I am driving. Does not even really cost me that much time as with connections, and security it takes about as long to fly anyway that is assuming it is not delayed or cancelled. Of the 10 flights I have taken in the last 3 years or so, 60% of them had some kind of delay or cancellation during one of the legs. Plus side I have gotten very good at packing density so I can take a weeks worth of provisions in my carry on backpack easily. No checked bags for me....

wetpaws 4y ago
TSA precheck makes everythin a breeze on domestic flights. International flights are a whole new beast though.
Scoundreller 4y ago
> Stand here with no shoes They now sell you a solution to bypass that step. Surely a little background check proves your shoes are safe.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  Why wouldn’t it?
- coin 4y ago
  "Racket" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering > offer a service to solve a nonexistent problem, or offer a service that solves a problem that would not exist without the racket Operating a racket is called racketeering.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    At least that racket pays the government directly. They came up with another racket to skip further in the line lets a private company take a cut for bribing the government to let you skip to the front and buy back some of your time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Secure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Secure
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      I got this free via a credit card, and the looks I got from the line as I was personally ushered past all of them was enough to make it a one-off thing. Heh.
    - godelski 4y ago
      > At least that racket pays the government directly. Yes and no? Yes, it creates jobs and pays people but it isn't like funds are being used to benefit society. They aren't being used to build roads or schools. There's no evidence to show that these funds are making flights safer either. We're giving up a lot of privacy for this and even giving up more, with the real ID act and pushes for facial recognition technologies. I think a lot of people, including me, would feel better about these inconveniences and the extra money we pay for them, if there was any real evidence to suggest that they actually made us safer. But since there isn't, after two decades of data, I wouldn't blame anyone for calling it a racket (as defined above). But on top of that, there's further rackets like what you are referring to. But the government also participates in this directly (Clear is indirect) through the TSA precheck. A racket can have multiple levels and multiple actors.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        Yes, I do not support either racket, but letting a private company insert themselves is an escalation
      - thrashh 4y ago
        I don’t think there can be data A well-run IT department will never have data that they prevent IT disasters
        godelski 4y ago
        I'm not sure that this is true. There's two obvious ways that an IT department can measure this. 1) They can see people attacking the system. We can even often see what these people are attempting to do! A lot of security research is focused on this, figuring out what attackers are trying to do. 2) We have post hoc analysis. We can see lots of attacks and then provide an intervention and see if those decrease. Since terrorist attacks were black swan events you're right that we can't really measure the effect of TSA, but then again, do we need to address black swan events? At least we need to compare the costs and it is pretty clear that the yearly number of increased deaths due to driving alone is higher than the number of deaths from decades of terrorist attacks and hijackings. I'd say we have pretty good data in both cases to make fairly reasonable conclusions about how effective these interventions are. There's a reason very few people question the need for an IT department. The ones that do don't question it for long after attempting to run without them.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  What is ironic, I was at a small airport while back and the Pre-Check line was longer than the normal security line.... people in normal security were getting through faster....
  - Scoundreller 4y ago
    Rumour has it they put the new staff on the Pre lines, so per-staff throughput can actually be lower.
- bmelton 4y ago
  I've yet to figure out how it's reasonable for the government to deny us our fourth amendment rights and then lease them back to us for $78, but I suppose I'm equally shocked at how inexpensive it is to violate those rights such that they've managed to make $78 / 5 years somehow profitable?
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    Ah well technically you have no 4th amendment right within 100 miles of the border or at any so-designated international airport. Details here. [1] [1] https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
    - bmelton 4y ago
      I believe the courts have decided in error.
      - runnerup 4y ago
        On this and many, many other things. Furthermore, if this is a result of correctly interpreting the constitution…our lawmakers should have, and still should, immediately change the constitution. We really need an explicit right to privacy. Third party doctrine is ridiculous as it applies to gmail, UPS, FedEx. TSA in general should be plainly unconstitutional. Americans should have reasonable rights even while crossing the border. Americans should still have the same rights vs. the US government when they’re not in America (not okay for FBI to tap my phone line while I’m in Germany, I still have the constitution protecting me as a U.S. citizen). Foreigners inside USA also should have full constitutional protections. 2nd amendment needs massive clarification, I don’t even care what just make it clear in plain language. If we needed a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol…Why wasn’t one needed for weed? How the Fuck did civil asset forfeiture get ruled to be legal? That needs an amendment. Why don’t citizens get recompense when the government fucks up and takes all their shit when they read the address on the warrant wrong? Why is the right to a speedy trial still take over a year often? And why are “innocent until proven guilty” people held in jail that whole time? How is imprisoning people in Guantanamo forever with no trial constitutional?
flappyeagle 4y ago
Like anything else, taking flights is a skill, improved by repetition, insight and effort
- ideamotor 4y ago
  And money.
version_five 4y ago
I'm a sometimes frequent flyer but less often in the US, so I don't have any kind of pre-screening. I have never had a problem, other than the occasional line, with TSA. I actually have found them regularly polite and joking. I think this could be because I'm familiar with the procedures, and generally very well organized to go through screening. There are lots of horror stories about flying, things can go wrong occasionally, personally I would fly anywhere that's > 3 hours or roughly the break even to get there faster, unless I need a car for some reason. If you are familiar with it it's really not as bad as the horror stories.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  It is not the agents I have a problem with, it is the process. You are correct the agents are normally friendly and efficient. I have objections about the process from having to take all your crap out, take your belt off, shoes, no liquids, stand with your hand over your head while someone in another room passed millimeter waves through you taking a look at a near pornographic photo of you... That does not seem like things a person not accused or convicted of a crime in a free society should have to be subjected to just to travel, that seems like something you would find in a Authoritarian dystopia novel not a free society
  - version_five 4y ago
    I agree completely. Somehow I've decided flying isn't my hill to die on and so i just try and go though the process as efficiently as possible, which ends up making it relatively painless. We shouldn't have to put up with it though.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    I opt-out of the scanner. Every time. It rarely delays me more than 10 minutes (and usually 3-5). I personally think it’s an unreasonable search (meaning, there’s a less intrusive way to accomplish the legitimate goal that TSA has); it seems like they don’t want to have that tested in court, so the opt-out process avoids giving a pax that standing to sue over it.
  - 4y ago
Gigachad 4y ago
Wow it’s so much easier in Australia. They upgraded the bag scanners recently so you don’t have to pull everything apart. Just chuck your bag down, stand in the scanner for a few seconds and it’s done. Never spent more than 10 minutes getting through security.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  Honestly the scanner is the part I object to the most Some US Airports have the new bag scanners, but you still have to remove your shoes, belt, and be scanned by the Millimeter Wave scanner while holding your hands over your head like a criminal
  - dboreham 4y ago
    Only if you didn't sign up TSA Precheck which every FF would do.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      And you ok with that? you do not find any irony, or problem with a government agency more or less violating you but then saying "if you pay us we will stop"
      - dmitrygr 4y ago
        You’ve just described taxes :)
        phpisthebest 4y ago
        Well how do you think I feel about taxes?
        godelski 4y ago
        Takes at least, in many cases, provide a public good. The leaky bucket (not sure if the bucket even can hold water at this point though) still transports water. The TSA does not provide any service to the public. On the other hand, they provide substantial inconvenience, drive up costs, and end up killing more people (since driving is more risky than flying). I get the joke you're making, but let's not pretend that taxes are the same thing. They are highly inefficient but the TSA has negative efficiency.
TacticalCoder 4y ago
> Today if my destination is with in a 10hr drive from me, I am driving. Same. It's not just the "stand here with no shoes": it's being treated like cattle. So I bought myself a very nice, second hand, high-end luxury car and it's basically first-class. Except the sound insulation and sound system in my car is much better than in a plane. And I leave exactly when I want. And I take a break when I want. I hate flying.
gnicholas 4y ago
> Today if my destination is with in a 10hr drive from me, I am driving. Does not even really cost me that much time as with connections, and security it takes about as long to fly anyway that is assuming it is not delayed or cancelled. I don't like flying either, but as someone who lives near SF I would never consider driving to San Diego for a meeting or conference. I have considered driving to LA, but it just doesn't make sense — especially if I'd have to pay $40-50/night to park my car once I'm there. Taking a flight from SJC to BUR is about as painless as it gets, and the last couple times I did it the planes were mostly empty. If connections were involved I'd feel differently, but I wouldn't drive instead of taking a 1-2 hour direct flight. I'm curious to know what airport you're near and if most popular destinations involve connections. Or maybe I just don't have a nice enough car, to make the drive more enjoyable!
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  I live in the midwest, I do not pay for parking, and a traffic jam for me is a 20min wait after an accident.
- rahimnathwani 4y ago
  Solo for a meeting it might not make sense. For a vacation with family though, it can be worth driving because: - unlike flight ticket cost, fuel cost doesn't go up linearly with the number of people - when you arrive in San Diego, you already have your car and your child's car seat - you don't have to commit to a specific return time or day
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    Yeah, we've done this for conference trips with the family, and it has been useful in that context. We've even gone all the way to San Diego, with an overnight stop partway to see relatives. But I would never drive even to LA, even for a multi-day conference, if I were traveling solo.
SanjayMehta 4y ago
Door to door short flights make no sense any more. For me the threshold is 7 hours.
maxerickson 4y ago
I don't enjoy the TSA screening, but I sure don't share the perspective that it's worse than driving for 4-5 hours. I flew from a small airport to Detroit several times this year. My perspective is probably colored by having someone pick me up each time, but it was like 3.5 hours of traveling to fly, with most of that being more or less relaxed, to avoid a 7 hour drive. It was almost cheaper just on gas (and certainly cheaper considering wear and tear).
- trillic 4y ago
  I’ve attempted Chicago to Detroit 4 times via plane before I started just driving every time, I was severely delayed each time. The weather in both cities is fairly volatile, traffic between them isn’t bad, and I can leave when I want. I prefer the Amtrak but it only goes a few times a day.
  - maxerickson 4y ago
    I agree that 5 hours is marginal, especially if you have a large airport on both ends (It takes me 10 minutes to get to the small airport here and there is ~1 smallish flight being screened at a time, so there is no need to be particularly early). I didn't state it very clearly, but I'm comparing the TSA screening to the 4-5 additional hours driving would entail over flying.
    - trillic 4y ago
      That's fair, for me security is never the issue with pre-check. It's getting to ORD or MDW via public transit or cab in crosstown traffic. It takes me almost an hour sometimes and at that point I could already be nearly a quarter of my way down the road.
- bmelton 4y ago
  It depends a ton on where and when. I had "The State of New York" as a client once, which required commuting from Maryland to Annapolis and staying for the week. It's about a 5 hour drive, vs a 1.5 hour flight, which seems like a slam dunk, but considering that the airport is a half hour away, and I had to arrive there an hour early for TSA, ride in a cramped plane with not enough leg room, then rent a car on the other end and drive a half an hour to the hotel, it was down to traffic to determine which method was faster re: total travel time. I found the drive more relaxing, more comfortable, and since I'd need a car at the destination anyway, just about the same degree of practicality. I basically determined then that 6 hours away was probably my breakeven point at which flying became obviously more practical, but even then it depends on the target airport, traffic, weather, etc. I certainly don't blink at the prospect of flying from Maryland to San Francisco, and would almost never consider driving instead, but IMO it's hard to fault someone valuing their rights over their time that it downweights flying significantly more than it does in my rankings. I should probably also factor in that our location affords us a great variety of places we can go by train, and anywhere obviously train-accessible usually makes that a strong option. New York makes almost zero sense to drive to, and while the big knock against trains are the cost, it works out when you consider the cost of parking in New York, and the convenience of showing up at the train station 5 minutes prior to departure.
feistypharit 4y ago
I’m in the same boat, except instead of driving, I decided to get my private pilots license. being able to hop in a plane whenever you want and not worry about traffic or tsa. I always thought it was super expensive and never knew what good it was to fly into a small airport with no car, however, now that I almost have it, I realize it’s a whole community. It’s not an easy process to get and somewhat high maintenance, but can be quite rewarding. However, it’s not cheaper than commercial. Expect about 10k for the license. Renting a small plane is about $175/hour. Owning a plane only makes sense if you plan to fly more than 100 hrs a year. You need to fly at least once a quarter and have faa checkride every 2 years. The small planes are very weather dependent. However, the first time you fly solo you really feel amazing!
- Ao7bei3s 4y ago
  I'm curious, don't you have the same problem with rental planes as with rental cars that while the cost of the pure travel time might not be so bad, what really gets you is that after you get somewhere, it just sits there, still costing money until you get back days later? I know that engine on time is particularly expensive for airplanes whereas for rental cars it's no factor, but I would also expect the pure rental time to be expensive for airplanes if you use it to go on trips as opposed to standalone flights ending back at the home airfield?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Many rental planes are rented for engine on time only. You can’t push it too far (take the plane for a year for two hours of flight time) but you can do weeks. I’ve done it.
- happyjack 4y ago
  You stole my comment! I fly my Cessna 206 about 200 hours a year. If there's bad weather ... I just wait it out or schedule my event the tail end of the trip. I won't fly commercial unless it's international now.
- kashunstva 4y ago
  Despite a lot of ratings myself, I have still have had to cancel a fair number of trips because my plane lacks known icing protections. I’m comfortable shooting an approach to minimums but icing is such a capricious and limiting problem for light aircraft.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Off-topic, this got me thinking - usually when we discuss impacts of flights on climate change and solutions we get into discussion of cost and profits vs lives saved. Its a struggle to push trhough anything that costs money. Yet after 9/11 we have put into place insanely expensive , inconvenient and restrictive system votually overnight. And the average amount of lives is saves is maybe zero, maybe a couple a year. Why is it so easy to do the latter but so hard to do the former?
arcticbull 4y ago
> I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Frequent fliers don't deal with any of that. The first thing you grab is TSA Pre, which is offered alone or part of Global Entry (or NEXUS if you don't mind interviewing along the US/Canada border). This restores your security experience to pre-9/11. You don't take anything off, or out, no laptops, etc. The application fee for TSA Pre and GE is waived with most high-end credit cards. Then to make sure you don't have to wait in line, you sign up for CLEAR which automatically takes you to the front of the TSA Pre line. This fee is also waived by the Amex Platinum. Then when you get back, Global Entry or NEXUS ensure you don't wait in the immigration queues either.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  Yes I understand all of those programs, why should have to sign up for all those things. Aside from the inherent classism of it all, which I am often shocked how dual minded people are when they complain about wealth but then absently support these kinds of programs. It is inherently anti-democratic for the government to implement these programs when they should be treating all individuals the same Then there are is the privacy, and constitutional issues with all of those programs, and a leniently of other things that I am sure have no problems for unprincipled persons. sadly I am someone of principle, and ethics
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    > ... why should we have to sign up for all those things? Yeah for sure. I agree you certainly shouldn't have to. > Aside from the inherent classism of it all, which I am often shocked how dual minded people are when they complain about wealth but then absently support these kinds of programs. I'm not super convinced by this because honestly flying is a luxury product. TSA Pre is like $80 for 5 years or about 1/4 of the average cab fare from town to the airport per year. The fact services like this cost more money because they get you priority access to a luxury good doesn't bother me. Remember you pay taxes and fees just to be on airport property (baked into the ticket), so this extra tax? Meh. The core service should still of course be better, but it does make sense that your most frequent and ofc lowest-risk users have a more streamlined experience. > Then there are is the privacy, and constitutional issues with all of those programs. I guess. My perspective is the relevant agencies all have this information already. They're getting manifests from the airlines and they have your record, travel history, etc. Are they really getting anything new through you signing up? Open to your take though.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
bern4444 4y ago
> the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Get TSA Precheck or Clear. Security takes ~10 minutes with TSA Pre Check and 2-3 minutes with clear. There's no way it's not worth it even if you only travel once a year with 2 flights.
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
this year I purchased a low-milage 99 Ford Explorer XLT for $650 and put a couple thousand into it (guy thought he was taking advantage of me). I didn't have to put nearly that much, but I did for the purpose of long-term maintenance as I want to have this vehicle for years. The back is big enough to fit a twin mattress, so I did exactly that. I then purchased one of those bags you can strap onto the top. I can now do things like drive down to water that's 4 or 5 hours away and stay for the weekend before coming back (gf loves fishing). w/i the last month I took it on a 9 hour drive down and back (so 18 hours total) and it ran extremely well for a vehicle that old. I'm super happy with it and it's one of those things that rolls around in your head until you finally commit and you wish you had done it sooner. So for me, now, unless there's a time reason I wouldn't fly even outside of a 10 hour drive. And a large part of that is, as you said, the way you're treated like a criminal. Just thinking about it, I can't wait for summer to show up :)
yread 4y ago
Note that your emissions per km are 2-3 times higher when driving than when flying (and the infrastructure and car manufacturing are probably even worse)
- daureg 4y ago
  do you a source for that? That sounds surprising to me https://www.statista.com/statistics/1185559/carbon-footprint-of-travel-per-kilometer-by-mode-of-transport/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1185559/carbon-footprint...
  - yread 4y ago
    Sorry, you're right I was thinking of just the fuel consumption, but with radiative forcing planes end up about the same as single passenger cars
more_corn 4y ago
You can pay a bribe to opt out of security theater. No naked scanner, shoes on, laptop stays in bag. Pre check lasts five years and my free credit card reimburses the fee. The card also gives me a free checked bag (which I rarely use). I pack in a roller bag which I often gate check. Still no water through tsa which is retarded. Guys, just sniff it. Or better yet make the traveler take a big swig. Anything dangerous isn’t even going to make it to the metal detector let alone on the flight.

wetpaws 4y ago

TSA precheck makes everythin a breeze on domestic flights. International flights are a whole new beast though.

Scoundreller 4y ago

> Stand here with no shoes They now sell you a solution to bypass that step. Surely a little background check proves your shoes are safe.

ethanbond 4y ago
Why wouldn’t it?
coin 4y ago
"Racket" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering > offer a service to solve a nonexistent problem, or offer a service that solves a problem that would not exist without the racket Operating a racket is called racketeering.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  At least that racket pays the government directly. They came up with another racket to skip further in the line lets a private company take a cut for bribing the government to let you skip to the front and buy back some of your time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Secure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Secure
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    I got this free via a credit card, and the looks I got from the line as I was personally ushered past all of them was enough to make it a one-off thing. Heh.
  - godelski 4y ago
    > At least that racket pays the government directly. Yes and no? Yes, it creates jobs and pays people but it isn't like funds are being used to benefit society. They aren't being used to build roads or schools. There's no evidence to show that these funds are making flights safer either. We're giving up a lot of privacy for this and even giving up more, with the real ID act and pushes for facial recognition technologies. I think a lot of people, including me, would feel better about these inconveniences and the extra money we pay for them, if there was any real evidence to suggest that they actually made us safer. But since there isn't, after two decades of data, I wouldn't blame anyone for calling it a racket (as defined above). But on top of that, there's further rackets like what you are referring to. But the government also participates in this directly (Clear is indirect) through the TSA precheck. A racket can have multiple levels and multiple actors.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      Yes, I do not support either racket, but letting a private company insert themselves is an escalation
    - thrashh 4y ago
      I don’t think there can be data A well-run IT department will never have data that they prevent IT disasters
      - godelski 4y ago
        I'm not sure that this is true. There's two obvious ways that an IT department can measure this. 1) They can see people attacking the system. We can even often see what these people are attempting to do! A lot of security research is focused on this, figuring out what attackers are trying to do. 2) We have post hoc analysis. We can see lots of attacks and then provide an intervention and see if those decrease. Since terrorist attacks were black swan events you're right that we can't really measure the effect of TSA, but then again, do we need to address black swan events? At least we need to compare the costs and it is pretty clear that the yearly number of increased deaths due to driving alone is higher than the number of deaths from decades of terrorist attacks and hijackings. I'd say we have pretty good data in both cases to make fairly reasonable conclusions about how effective these interventions are. There's a reason very few people question the need for an IT department. The ones that do don't question it for long after attempting to run without them.
phpisthebest 4y ago
What is ironic, I was at a small airport while back and the Pre-Check line was longer than the normal security line.... people in normal security were getting through faster....
- Scoundreller 4y ago
  Rumour has it they put the new staff on the Pre lines, so per-staff throughput can actually be lower.
bmelton 4y ago
I've yet to figure out how it's reasonable for the government to deny us our fourth amendment rights and then lease them back to us for $78, but I suppose I'm equally shocked at how inexpensive it is to violate those rights such that they've managed to make $78 / 5 years somehow profitable?
- arcticbull 4y ago
  Ah well technically you have no 4th amendment right within 100 miles of the border or at any so-designated international airport. Details here. [1] [1] https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
  - bmelton 4y ago
    I believe the courts have decided in error.
    - runnerup 4y ago
      On this and many, many other things. Furthermore, if this is a result of correctly interpreting the constitution…our lawmakers should have, and still should, immediately change the constitution. We really need an explicit right to privacy. Third party doctrine is ridiculous as it applies to gmail, UPS, FedEx. TSA in general should be plainly unconstitutional. Americans should have reasonable rights even while crossing the border. Americans should still have the same rights vs. the US government when they’re not in America (not okay for FBI to tap my phone line while I’m in Germany, I still have the constitution protecting me as a U.S. citizen). Foreigners inside USA also should have full constitutional protections. 2nd amendment needs massive clarification, I don’t even care what just make it clear in plain language. If we needed a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol…Why wasn’t one needed for weed? How the Fuck did civil asset forfeiture get ruled to be legal? That needs an amendment. Why don’t citizens get recompense when the government fucks up and takes all their shit when they read the address on the warrant wrong? Why is the right to a speedy trial still take over a year often? And why are “innocent until proven guilty” people held in jail that whole time? How is imprisoning people in Guantanamo forever with no trial constitutional?

flappyeagle 4y ago

Like anything else, taking flights is a skill, improved by repetition, insight and effort

ideamotor 4y ago
And money.

version_five 4y ago

I'm a sometimes frequent flyer but less often in the US, so I don't have any kind of pre-screening. I have never had a problem, other than the occasional line, with TSA. I actually have found them regularly polite and joking. I think this could be because I'm familiar with the procedures, and generally very well organized to go through screening. There are lots of horror stories about flying, things can go wrong occasionally, personally I would fly anywhere that's > 3 hours or roughly the break even to get there faster, unless I need a car for some reason. If you are familiar with it it's really not as bad as the horror stories.

phpisthebest 4y ago
It is not the agents I have a problem with, it is the process. You are correct the agents are normally friendly and efficient. I have objections about the process from having to take all your crap out, take your belt off, shoes, no liquids, stand with your hand over your head while someone in another room passed millimeter waves through you taking a look at a near pornographic photo of you... That does not seem like things a person not accused or convicted of a crime in a free society should have to be subjected to just to travel, that seems like something you would find in a Authoritarian dystopia novel not a free society
- version_five 4y ago
  I agree completely. Somehow I've decided flying isn't my hill to die on and so i just try and go though the process as efficiently as possible, which ends up making it relatively painless. We shouldn't have to put up with it though.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  I opt-out of the scanner. Every time. It rarely delays me more than 10 minutes (and usually 3-5). I personally think it’s an unreasonable search (meaning, there’s a less intrusive way to accomplish the legitimate goal that TSA has); it seems like they don’t want to have that tested in court, so the opt-out process avoids giving a pax that standing to sue over it.
- 4y ago

Gigachad 4y ago

Wow it’s so much easier in Australia. They upgraded the bag scanners recently so you don’t have to pull everything apart. Just chuck your bag down, stand in the scanner for a few seconds and it’s done. Never spent more than 10 minutes getting through security.

phpisthebest 4y ago
Honestly the scanner is the part I object to the most Some US Airports have the new bag scanners, but you still have to remove your shoes, belt, and be scanned by the Millimeter Wave scanner while holding your hands over your head like a criminal
- dboreham 4y ago
  Only if you didn't sign up TSA Precheck which every FF would do.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    And you ok with that? you do not find any irony, or problem with a government agency more or less violating you but then saying "if you pay us we will stop"
    - dmitrygr 4y ago
      You’ve just described taxes :)
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        Well how do you think I feel about taxes?
      - godelski 4y ago
        Takes at least, in many cases, provide a public good. The leaky bucket (not sure if the bucket even can hold water at this point though) still transports water. The TSA does not provide any service to the public. On the other hand, they provide substantial inconvenience, drive up costs, and end up killing more people (since driving is more risky than flying). I get the joke you're making, but let's not pretend that taxes are the same thing. They are highly inefficient but the TSA has negative efficiency.

TacticalCoder 4y ago

> Today if my destination is with in a 10hr drive from me, I am driving. Same. It's not just the "stand here with no shoes": it's being treated like cattle. So I bought myself a very nice, second hand, high-end luxury car and it's basically first-class. Except the sound insulation and sound system in my car is much better than in a plane. And I leave exactly when I want. And I take a break when I want. I hate flying.

gnicholas 4y ago

> Today if my destination is with in a 10hr drive from me, I am driving. Does not even really cost me that much time as with connections, and security it takes about as long to fly anyway that is assuming it is not delayed or cancelled. I don't like flying either, but as someone who lives near SF I would never consider driving to San Diego for a meeting or conference. I have considered driving to LA, but it just doesn't make sense — especially if I'd have to pay $40-50/night to park my car once I'm there. Taking a flight from SJC to BUR is about as painless as it gets, and the last couple times I did it the planes were mostly empty. If connections were involved I'd feel differently, but I wouldn't drive instead of taking a 1-2 hour direct flight. I'm curious to know what airport you're near and if most popular destinations involve connections. Or maybe I just don't have a nice enough car, to make the drive more enjoyable!

phpisthebest 4y ago
I live in the midwest, I do not pay for parking, and a traffic jam for me is a 20min wait after an accident.
rahimnathwani 4y ago
Solo for a meeting it might not make sense. For a vacation with family though, it can be worth driving because: - unlike flight ticket cost, fuel cost doesn't go up linearly with the number of people - when you arrive in San Diego, you already have your car and your child's car seat - you don't have to commit to a specific return time or day
- gnicholas 4y ago
  Yeah, we've done this for conference trips with the family, and it has been useful in that context. We've even gone all the way to San Diego, with an overnight stop partway to see relatives. But I would never drive even to LA, even for a multi-day conference, if I were traveling solo.

SanjayMehta 4y ago

Door to door short flights make no sense any more. For me the threshold is 7 hours.

maxerickson 4y ago

I don't enjoy the TSA screening, but I sure don't share the perspective that it's worse than driving for 4-5 hours. I flew from a small airport to Detroit several times this year. My perspective is probably colored by having someone pick me up each time, but it was like 3.5 hours of traveling to fly, with most of that being more or less relaxed, to avoid a 7 hour drive. It was almost cheaper just on gas (and certainly cheaper considering wear and tear).

trillic 4y ago
I’ve attempted Chicago to Detroit 4 times via plane before I started just driving every time, I was severely delayed each time. The weather in both cities is fairly volatile, traffic between them isn’t bad, and I can leave when I want. I prefer the Amtrak but it only goes a few times a day.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  I agree that 5 hours is marginal, especially if you have a large airport on both ends (It takes me 10 minutes to get to the small airport here and there is ~1 smallish flight being screened at a time, so there is no need to be particularly early). I didn't state it very clearly, but I'm comparing the TSA screening to the 4-5 additional hours driving would entail over flying.
  - trillic 4y ago
    That's fair, for me security is never the issue with pre-check. It's getting to ORD or MDW via public transit or cab in crosstown traffic. It takes me almost an hour sometimes and at that point I could already be nearly a quarter of my way down the road.
bmelton 4y ago
It depends a ton on where and when. I had "The State of New York" as a client once, which required commuting from Maryland to Annapolis and staying for the week. It's about a 5 hour drive, vs a 1.5 hour flight, which seems like a slam dunk, but considering that the airport is a half hour away, and I had to arrive there an hour early for TSA, ride in a cramped plane with not enough leg room, then rent a car on the other end and drive a half an hour to the hotel, it was down to traffic to determine which method was faster re: total travel time. I found the drive more relaxing, more comfortable, and since I'd need a car at the destination anyway, just about the same degree of practicality. I basically determined then that 6 hours away was probably my breakeven point at which flying became obviously more practical, but even then it depends on the target airport, traffic, weather, etc. I certainly don't blink at the prospect of flying from Maryland to San Francisco, and would almost never consider driving instead, but IMO it's hard to fault someone valuing their rights over their time that it downweights flying significantly more than it does in my rankings. I should probably also factor in that our location affords us a great variety of places we can go by train, and anywhere obviously train-accessible usually makes that a strong option. New York makes almost zero sense to drive to, and while the big knock against trains are the cost, it works out when you consider the cost of parking in New York, and the convenience of showing up at the train station 5 minutes prior to departure.

feistypharit 4y ago

I’m in the same boat, except instead of driving, I decided to get my private pilots license. being able to hop in a plane whenever you want and not worry about traffic or tsa. I always thought it was super expensive and never knew what good it was to fly into a small airport with no car, however, now that I almost have it, I realize it’s a whole community. It’s not an easy process to get and somewhat high maintenance, but can be quite rewarding. However, it’s not cheaper than commercial. Expect about 10k for the license. Renting a small plane is about $175/hour. Owning a plane only makes sense if you plan to fly more than 100 hrs a year. You need to fly at least once a quarter and have faa checkride every 2 years. The small planes are very weather dependent. However, the first time you fly solo you really feel amazing!

Ao7bei3s 4y ago
I'm curious, don't you have the same problem with rental planes as with rental cars that while the cost of the pure travel time might not be so bad, what really gets you is that after you get somewhere, it just sits there, still costing money until you get back days later? I know that engine on time is particularly expensive for airplanes whereas for rental cars it's no factor, but I would also expect the pure rental time to be expensive for airplanes if you use it to go on trips as opposed to standalone flights ending back at the home airfield?
- bombcar 4y ago
  Many rental planes are rented for engine on time only. You can’t push it too far (take the plane for a year for two hours of flight time) but you can do weeks. I’ve done it.
happyjack 4y ago
You stole my comment! I fly my Cessna 206 about 200 hours a year. If there's bad weather ... I just wait it out or schedule my event the tail end of the trip. I won't fly commercial unless it's international now.
kashunstva 4y ago
Despite a lot of ratings myself, I have still have had to cancel a fair number of trips because my plane lacks known icing protections. I’m comfortable shooting an approach to minimums but icing is such a capricious and limiting problem for light aircraft.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

> I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Off-topic, this got me thinking - usually when we discuss impacts of flights on climate change and solutions we get into discussion of cost and profits vs lives saved. Its a struggle to push trhough anything that costs money. Yet after 9/11 we have put into place insanely expensive , inconvenient and restrictive system votually overnight. And the average amount of lives is saves is maybe zero, maybe a couple a year. Why is it so easy to do the latter but so hard to do the former?

arcticbull 4y ago

> I cant image flying that much. I am old enough to remember pre-911 flying and how much better it was before the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Frequent fliers don't deal with any of that. The first thing you grab is TSA Pre, which is offered alone or part of Global Entry (or NEXUS if you don't mind interviewing along the US/Canada border). This restores your security experience to pre-9/11. You don't take anything off, or out, no laptops, etc. The application fee for TSA Pre and GE is waived with most high-end credit cards. Then to make sure you don't have to wait in line, you sign up for CLEAR which automatically takes you to the front of the TSA Pre line. This fee is also waived by the Amex Platinum. Then when you get back, Global Entry or NEXUS ensure you don't wait in the immigration queues either.

phpisthebest 4y ago
Yes I understand all of those programs, why should have to sign up for all those things. Aside from the inherent classism of it all, which I am often shocked how dual minded people are when they complain about wealth but then absently support these kinds of programs. It is inherently anti-democratic for the government to implement these programs when they should be treating all individuals the same Then there are is the privacy, and constitutional issues with all of those programs, and a leniently of other things that I am sure have no problems for unprincipled persons. sadly I am someone of principle, and ethics
- arcticbull 4y ago
  > ... why should we have to sign up for all those things? Yeah for sure. I agree you certainly shouldn't have to. > Aside from the inherent classism of it all, which I am often shocked how dual minded people are when they complain about wealth but then absently support these kinds of programs. I'm not super convinced by this because honestly flying is a luxury product. TSA Pre is like $80 for 5 years or about 1/4 of the average cab fare from town to the airport per year. The fact services like this cost more money because they get you priority access to a luxury good doesn't bother me. Remember you pay taxes and fees just to be on airport property (baked into the ticket), so this extra tax? Meh. The core service should still of course be better, but it does make sense that your most frequent and ofc lowest-risk users have a more streamlined experience. > Then there are is the privacy, and constitutional issues with all of those programs. I guess. My perspective is the relevant agencies all have this information already. They're getting manifests from the airlines and they have your record, travel history, etc. Are they really getting anything new through you signing up? Open to your take though.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

bern4444 4y ago

> the TSA and their "Stand here with no shoes while we treat you like a criminal" procedures. Get TSA Precheck or Clear. Security takes ~10 minutes with TSA Pre Check and 2-3 minutes with clear. There's no way it's not worth it even if you only travel once a year with 2 flights.

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago

this year I purchased a low-milage 99 Ford Explorer XLT for $650 and put a couple thousand into it (guy thought he was taking advantage of me). I didn't have to put nearly that much, but I did for the purpose of long-term maintenance as I want to have this vehicle for years. The back is big enough to fit a twin mattress, so I did exactly that. I then purchased one of those bags you can strap onto the top. I can now do things like drive down to water that's 4 or 5 hours away and stay for the weekend before coming back (gf loves fishing). w/i the last month I took it on a 9 hour drive down and back (so 18 hours total) and it ran extremely well for a vehicle that old. I'm super happy with it and it's one of those things that rolls around in your head until you finally commit and you wish you had done it sooner. So for me, now, unless there's a time reason I wouldn't fly even outside of a 10 hour drive. And a large part of that is, as you said, the way you're treated like a criminal. Just thinking about it, I can't wait for summer to show up :)

yread 4y ago

Note that your emissions per km are 2-3 times higher when driving than when flying (and the infrastructure and car manufacturing are probably even worse)

daureg 4y ago
do you a source for that? That sounds surprising to me https://www.statista.com/statistics/1185559/carbon-footprint-of-travel-per-kilometer-by-mode-of-transport/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1185559/carbon-footprint...
- yread 4y ago
  Sorry, you're right I was thinking of just the fuel consumption, but with radiative forcing planes end up about the same as single passenger cars

more_corn 4y ago

You can pay a bribe to opt out of security theater. No naked scanner, shoes on, laptop stays in bag. Pre check lasts five years and my free credit card reimburses the fee. The card also gives me a free checked bag (which I rarely use). I pack in a roller bag which I often gate check. Still no water through tsa which is retarded. Guys, just sniff it. Or better yet make the traveler take a big swig. Anything dangerous isn’t even going to make it to the metal detector let alone on the flight.