Security here in the United States, particularly after the events of September 11 2001, are a frequent topic in the media and often the target of criticism.  Recently, we’ve seen the introduction of new scanning image machines that can be used to “search” our bodies and invasively at that.  The TSA has ruled that if you decline to enter these machines, you’re now subject to a much more intrusive “pat down” search that seems designed to make entering the scanning image machine pleasant.

The reason people get upset with these security measures is because they are mere theater.  Ask anyone what it is and has been like traveling from Europe to the United States since the 1970’s and particularly since the 1990’s when it comes to security.  It has always been very serious business in Europe and I find it ironic that we dictate security terms to Europe since the truth is that much of what we engage in here wouldn’t meet muster in Europe.

Arguably, the security regimes are much the same now.  The difference is in the not-so-subtle details.  In Europe, those performing security checks are professionals behaving professionally while doing a very professional job.  Anyone who has passed through European security knows exactly what I’m talking about. 

Sadly, here in the United States, we rightly perceive much of our security being performed by people who strike us as the cheapest available for the job and who rarely strike us as being professionals doing a professional job. 

I found myself highly irritated when I was at DFW airport awaiting the arrival of a family member and watched TSA security people do what  could only be described as a bad job routinely.  Clearly someone had told these people that being “cheerful” and “friendly” would help.  First off, we don’t expect security people to be cheerful and friendly.  We really don’t and you won’t find them behaving that way in other places in the world.  We expect them to be professional. 

And not for nothing, “professional” isn’t defined as “macho cop” with a chip on his/her shoulder either.

In the time I spent watching these TSA team members, I noticed that the first woman performing ID checks was looking at the IDs but was NOT looking up at  the passengers faces.  If anything, she appeared intent on detecting a fraudulent ID.   Sadly, she misseed every opportunity to match that ID to a face and do a “gut check” on their intent. 

Next, there were two TSA team members attempting to marshal people’s goods into the x-ray machines and people through the metal detectors.  Well, actually, one of those two was doing that.  That person, a man, was doing a credible job of directing people on what to do to pass through security.  He was, however, again not looking at the faces of anyone he was addressing.  If anything, he appeared to be looking anywhere but at these people.  The other person, a man, spent most of his time flirting with the woman who was running the x-ray machine. 

Which brings us to the woman who was running the x-ray machine.  I have no idea of how you detect suspicious objects in luggage when you’re flirting with anyone.  It would seem to me that focus and attention would be the watchwords when it comes to this duty.   There were two lines and another person watching the other x-ray machine who was not flirting with anyone but who didn’t seem any more interested in focusing on the screen displaying people’s personal items either. 

Finally, there were three more post-metal detector TSA team members who were just talking *loud*.  When I say loud, I mean loud enough for me to clearly understand them from a good 40 to 50 feet away.  They were loud in barking at passengers, they were loud in discussing whether or not to eat at TGI Fridays and they were loud in their instructions to people they had to pat down.

Doesn’t sound very professional, does it?

Then I think about the time I was traveling from Belgium back to my home in the DFW area.  At the screening, the security people found a multi-tool in my briefcase.  A tool that had been in my briefcase since I left and which I had forgotten was in an interior pocket.  Suddenly I was “covered” on both sides by security personnel and escorted away (as I shouted to my wife to just get on the plane) to a secure area.  I was asked why I had the multi-tool and I explained it was literally a tool of my business at that time ( I was a general contractor) and had simply left it in the briefcase foolishly.  I was polite and direct with my response.  They continued to talk to me for another 2 minutes until satisfied I wasn’t a threat.  Then they escorted me back to the front of the airport to box and check in my tool for the flight.  Once done, I was escorted back to the security line where I once again went through all their security including a second pat down. 

Never once was it “macho cop” or “airy friendliness”.  It was entirely serious and professional.  And that, my friends, was in 1998.

That’s why we consider these procedures a joke here in the US.  They are theater rather than professional and even though we aren’t security professionals ourselves, we quickly detect that the people who are supposedly “guarding” us aren’t taking their own jobs seriously.  I am not a security professional and I cannot offer how the procedures could be better.  I can, however, argue that the front line people performing this job aren’tprofessional and its communicated day in and day out.

What’s more, when we hear of these same TSA personnel engaged in theft, intimidation and practical jokes while working, it doesn’t improve our sense that this duty and job are being taken seriously by anyone actually performing the role.  

It comes as no surprise to me that pilots (and other flight crew) are objecting to their treatment in lines.  It comes as no surprise to me that passengers are hostile to the procedures either.  I doubt seriously that anyone would object to these very same procedure *if* they were performed in a serious and professional manner.

But they really aren’t, are they.  Oh, occasionally we see it being done right.  The next time you do see that, notice that no one is arguing or complaining or groaning over the security they’re being asked to endure.  The people doing it are taking it seriously and the people going through it tend to take it seriously at that point too.

Filed under: Airports by ajax
1 Comment »

Alaska Airlines and its sister company, Horizon Airlines have announced a pilot program to introduce electronic boarding passes into their system.

 

Electronic boarding passes are displayed on a PDA with a bar code that can be scanned at the airport.  Continental began pioneering this technology but Delta and American Airlines have been testing it out at various airports over the past several months as well.  All of the anecdotal reports that I’ve read so far seem to indicate that it has worked well and fairly smoothly with the only comments being that some TSA officers were surprised by seeing one but not unfamiliar with it.

 

What do you do if you cannot get your PDA to display the boarding pass?  You can always get a paper copy by checking in at the airport as well.   Passengers choosing this option aren’t at risk just because of a problem with their PDA. 

 

Alaska / Horizon also introduced their new mobile website at:

 

http://www.flyasqx.com/

 

 

If you’ve tried this technology on a recent flight, your comments on it are welcome.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

First, read this USA Today article HERE.   It would appear that there is a plan to give 10,000 (or more) TSA staff access to “secret” intelligence for performing their duties better.  On the surface, this decision has some merit in that it *could* guide a professional security agent better on what to look for as a threat. 

 

But you first have to have professional security agents and I would argue that TSA does not possess many of those.  Just read the posts at the link HERE. 

 

Frankly, the last thing we need or want is a large population of TSA agents using such intelligence to refine their justifications for unprofessional behaviour under the guise of “he/she fits the profile we read intelligence about.”  You see, having the intelligence is just one part of the equation in using it.  The other part is having the training and good judgement necessary to use it effectively.  That’s something I don’t think the TSA has proven it possesses given its KeystoneKops behaviour.

Filed under: security by ajax
No Comments »

Dave Davies of the Philadelphia Daily News has this story on a college physics students HERE.  Nick George was detained last August in Philadelphia for several hours because he had arabic flash cards and his passport had been stamped in the Sudan, Egypt and Jordan.  He backpaced in the Sudan and Egypt and attended a semester of college in Jordan.  You see, Nick George is studying arabic and actually hopes to use this knowledge to assist our government.

 

George readily admits that he probably warranted a second look and didn’t object initially.  It was when he was detained, handcuffed for several hours and questioned snidely by both local law enforcement as well as the FBI that it became a bit intrusive.  After several hours, it was determined he wasn’t a “threat”, given a ticket for the next day and moved along without further explanation.

 

Read the story.  Look at this man’s photo. 

 

I think you’ll find that it stretcheds credulity (a word that I’m beginning to think is beyond the TSA’s vocabulary) that this person would require detainment for several hours after the initial “second look”.  Frankly, it points to a bias in the TSA (and law enforcement in general) that reflects ignorance and borderline racism.  But, then, we already kind of knew that, didn’t we.  See these posts HERE and HERE. 

 

Once again, we have strong evidence of a problem with the TSA in general and in Philadelphia in particular.  What concerns me greatest is the obvious appearance of ineptitude in actually guarding against terrorist acts.  These reactions on the part of the TSA showcase a group of people who are acting as if they are actors in a TV drama rather than as real world, professional security officers.  I cannot fathom why we, US citizens, might find this acceptable anymore as it does put us at greater risk every day.

Filed under: security by ajax
1 Comment »

First, read this newstory HERE and this newstory HERE about a Continental Airlines flight to Bogota, Colombia that was diverted to Jacksonville, FL when someone apparently identified a person the passenger manifest as being on the “no fly” list.

 

First, how did someone manage to board the aircraft if their name was on the “no fly” list?  That would seem to imply a breakdown either at Continental or the TSA itself.  Just because the TSA seems intent on blowing it at every chance, I’ll speculate it was a problem on the TSA’s end. 

 

Second, note this paragraph:

 

The situation was quite scary for the 75 passengers aboard Continental flight 881 in light of the Christmas day attempted bombing of a Detroit flight by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

 

Really?  They were all sitting there terrified?   I think the journalist is engaging in a bit of fantasy here.  I guarantee you that those passengers were kept in the dark about this and the reason given for a diversion wasn’t not “Ladies and Gentlemen, we might have a terrorist on board so please keep your seat belts fastened while we divert the aircraft so this person can be met by the FBI.”  

 

More than likely, unspecified but routine reasons were given and there was no activity on board other than the loud sighs of passengers being inconvenienced again. 

 

Shame on the journalists for writing such garbage.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

CNN is reporting that the Transportation Security Administration is having to investigate a “Jeopardy Board” at an Air Marshal field office in Florida which ridicules gays, women and other minorities.  Read the story HERE.

 

Once again, another huge slice of evidence that the TSA has no professional conduct ingrained in its organization.  What is worse, not only is this evidence of a lack of professional conduct, it is evidence that, at least at one office, there is a complete lack of regard for treating people within their own organization without prejudice.  And if they cannot treat people within their organization with fairness, how can we expect them to treat the public with fairness.

 

Furthermore, if their own agents and guards are engaged in childish, unprofessional behaviour, it is a sure sign they are also not engaged in doing their job.  In a way, this should elevate security concerns far more than any unspecified threat offered by the government.

Filed under: security by ajax
No Comments »

According to USA Today / AP in this story HERE, a resident of Brooklyn, NY recently photographed a TSA agent sleeping on the job at New York City’s La Guardia Airport and posted it online.   You can see the photo at this LINK.

 

A spokesperson for the TSA said the guard was put on desk duty while the TSA investigated and speculated that she might have been on “break”.    And judging from the photo, that chance exists . . . barely.

 

This is what I mean about the TSA having no appearance at all of being professional.  It doesn’t matter if that woman sleeping was innocent or not, it does not come off as professional conduct.  Furthermore, if she really is that sleepy, how good is she doing her job being on the alert for suspicious items and people?  Probably not good. 

 

It takes a long time to repair an image in the public’s eye.   With this latest story as well as the antics I wrote about HERE as well as the poorly organized reaction to events on Christmas and afterwards, this leads to no confidence on the part of passengers.  A lack of confidence makes the passengers rebellious and less willing to cooperate with security needs. 

 

You know who is professional?  The National Park Service.  The FBI is professional.

 

The TSA is no more impressive than a knock knock joke.

Filed under: Airports by ajax
No Comments »

No, seriously, they do.  This column by Daniel Rubin on Philly.Com HERE has all the details but I’ll summarize.

 

It would seem that some TSA guard decided to search a woman’s luggage and then pulled out a small, clear plastic white baggie filled with white powder and then asked “OK, where did you get it?”  He kept her going for a bit of time and then confessed it was a joke.  The woman, a young college student, was, in the meantime, picturing her entire life crumbling around here and wondering just how someone got to her luggage.  She was, quite literally, in tears as she walked away.

 

Yeah, the TSA investigated and then fired the guard.  So what. 

 

Seriously, so what.  Firing that employee isn’t going to fix an endemic problem.  It isn’t going to send the right message to the other poorly trained guards.  So, so what?  It doesn’t fix a thing. 

 

This kind of behaviour, this lack of professional conduct is seen by travelers every day of the year.  I have watched TSA guards verbally abuse passengers, shout at kids, act with retribution towards passengers who had the courage to question an behaviour and even attempt to steal from people.  Yeah, that last item is something I personally experienced several years ago in the airport in Atlanta. 

 

That’s the problem.  We don’t have a well trained, professional group of agents capable of protecting us.  We have an extremely irregular set of people who apparently are more interested in money, jokes or abuse than doing their job which is, quite literally, to prevent an air catastrophe. 

 

And people wonder why we don’t feel safe in the air.

Filed under: Airports by ajax
1 Comment »

It has been 2 weeks since the Underwear Bomber made his attempt to take down a Northwest Airlines A330 en-route from Amsterdam to Detroit.  In that time, we have seen all manner of posturing by the public, government officials and pundits as to this serious security lapse.   My last comments on this are HERE.

 

Since my last comments, I’ve been appalled by a number of people’s statements on this issue.  I’ve been appalled by former Vice President Dick Cheney making political hay out of this.  I’m deeply disappointed at the criticisms and obstruction on the part of Senators Jim DeMint and John McCain with respect to the TSA and its nominated leader, Erroll Southers.  I’m deeply disappointed by President Obama’s administration in describing this as a terrible failure in our security. 

 

The most sensible writing I’ve found on this topic is by Bruce Schneier (which can be read HERE)  and probably because, yes, it agrees with me.  That doesn’t necessarily come easy from me because while I’ve respected Mr. Schneier’s opinions and while I do feel he is dead on right about these security issues (and has been for a long time), I also think he oftens shouts about these issues too loudly. 

 

But he’s right.  This wasn’t a failure in security.  Certainly the terrorists didn’t win either.   Mr. Schneier is correct in pointing out that our security reduced this attempt to a near certain failure. 

 

For the past week, all I’ve heard and read about this issue is that we’re enacting measures to counter an attempt like this in the future.  Well, in some respects, yes, we should do that.  However, many people, including me, Mr. Schneier and others, have pointed out that terrorists, in particular Al Qaeda, *rarely* if ever make the same kind attempt twice.  So, looking for a Nigerian with PETN sewed into his underwear while carrying a syringe on his person is almost certainly going to fail us.

 

Yes, the public does expect something to be done.  And it should.  It is even entitled to see something being done.  Doing something doesn’t mean doing anything.  It means doing something that really does improve both the real and perceived level of security we might experience when traveling.  The biggest part of the problem in this whole debate is that despite excellent security already going on, the public does *not* feel that it either good, real or substantive. 

 

The public is right, too.  At the ground level, we observe too many Keystone Kop events taking place.  Just a few days ago, we shut down one of the largest airports in our country and inconvenienced thousands and thousands of people because a TSA security guard left their post.  Just walked away and allowed a man to enter the sterile gate area unchallenged.  Read about the most recent developments in that HERE and HERE.

 

The TSA says it takes responsibility.  Really?  Frankly, I don’t care.  The TSA and its guards should be one hell of a lot more responsible and professional than that at any time.

 

What is appalling is that TSA video cameras weren’t recording and it took 80+ minutes for the TSA to notify the NYNJ Port Authority (who runs the airports) of the breach and then they had to rely on Continental Airlines’ cameras to try to figure out what happened.   Spokeswoman Ann Davis of the TSA said:

 

Davis said Monday that although the TSA was unable to locate the man, any threat he may have presented was eliminated “by rescreening everyone and re-combing the airport to make sure he didn’t introduce anything to the environment or hand anything off to anyone.”

 

I have an answer.   Having to clear a terminal and re-screen thousands of people and delay untold numbers of flights does not lend credence to the idea that the TSA has a handle on these issues.  It just doesn’t.  Don’t take responsibility for it, do something about it.  Do something real and tangible.  The TSA should be deeply ashamed and shunned for such a lack of professionalism.  Right now, they look like a pack of huckleberries and that is not good.  It gives terrorists the idea that something *is* breachable.

 

Lack of professionalism, good judgement or proper perspective is missing from other quarters as well.  Take this opinion piece by Steve Danyluk on CNN which can be read HERE.  

 

Pilot Danyluk (A first officer for a major US airline) reckons that an emergency alert should have been sent out and a major effort should have been put into action upon this act taking place.  He’s outraged that he learned of the event on his iPhone after flying a 6 hour flight and landing. 

 

That is absurd.  First, there was no evidence whatsoever that this was a coordinated attack.  You should respond in Danyluk’s desired manner if there is such evidence but there was absolute zero evidence that this was a coordinated attack.  None.  Too those who say you can never be too safe, I respond, yes, you can.   To have responded in such a way would have been like presuming an entire neighborhood was under attack after one house experienced a burglary.

 

Second, I wonder what Pilot Danyluk would have done if he had been alerted.  Neither he nor his captain can leave the cockpit and wander among the aircraft searching for suspicious people.  His cockpit door is hardened in such a way that it would probably take more than a fire axe to breach it.  His cabin crew are not the best trained security staff to identify and secure a suspicious person (and I have plenty of that evidence coming up.)   The best thing he could have done was fly his airplane to its destination.  He did that. 

 

Third, an alert would have prepared him no more for an explosion.  Even if he had experienced an explosion, he certainly couldn’t do anything about it any earlier.  And if he had experienced an explosion, he would have been very busy getting that aircraft under control and pointed to a safe landing location.  

 

The truth is, it takes a pretty big bomb to take out a commercial airliner.   Oh, it could have severely damaged the aircraft and possibly hurt or killed someone but the likelihood of someone having enough explosive and a good enough detonator to wipe an aircraft from the sky with our current security in place is extremely statistically insignificant. 

 

Take the example of the DHL Airbus A300 being hit in Baghdad in 2003 by a surface to air missile.  You can read an account HERE.   A large, twin engined, wide body aircraft that had just taken off from Baghdad executing a special rapid climb procedure and fully loaded with fuel was hit by a surface to air missile that was *designed* to take out aircraft and  they still made it to the ground.  Yes, the recovery was due to the professionalism of the pilots and some prior knowledge of how to use differential engine thrust to “steer” the airplane (as a result of the THIS incident) but this aircraft was hit by a flying bomb traveling more than twice the speed of sound with a 6lbs  warhead with a high explosive impact fuse designed to fragment upon impact and survived relatively in tact.  You can’t carry that kind of thing in your underwear. 

 

I understand why Pilot Danyluk is “furious”.  He’s a type A pilot and type A pilots think they can always do something about something.   It’s a nice thought but there really wasn’t anything for him to do that he wasn’t already doing  provided he was following standard security procedures while in flight.   He can stomp his feet and write opinions on CNN all he wants but it does NOT mean that security failed him or anyone else.

 

It isn’t just pilots.  Well, it is pilots (still) but it is also flight crew, ATC and even NORAD. 

 

It would appear that a man became “unruly” on a Hawaiian Airlines flight from Portland, Oregon to Hawaii on Wednesday.   The captain decided to turn back to Portland (probably because it was just as easy to go there as anywhere else) and suddenly the flight is being “escorted” by F-15 fighters scrambled up by NORAD. 

 

You can not make this stuff up.  Read about this incident HERE. 

 

Can’t be too safe, right?  Wrong.   What is notable about this news story is that this aircraft returned to Portland, dropped the passenger off into the waiting hands of the FBI who, after a short while later, determined that no laws had been broken and released him.    This is very suspicious and sounds much more like a flightcrew having a hissy fit over a grumpy passenger rather than someone who was acting in a manner that justified a 90 minute diversion and meeting the aircraft with FBI. 

 

Certainly it would appear that sending F-15 fighters (and spending thousands of dollars) to escort this diversion was a bit foolish and wasteful. 

 

The best security in any situation including on an aircraft is using good judgement.  Good judgement is not “better safe than sorry” but, rather, assessing a situation for what it is rather than what it isn’t.  

 

The pubic will begin to perceive that we have good security not when things like these events don’t happen but when how we handle them becomes professional, efficient and proactive.  We have a decent defensive security process but what we don’t have is a uniform, professional example of it in the most public of representatives, the TSA. 

 

Leaving all good sense and judgement in the closet and overreacting to events like this serve absolutely no good purpose and even weaken security in the long run. 

 

I welcome comments on this post.

Filed under: Airline News, Airports by ajax
1 Comment »

The Cranky Flier made this post to his blog last week. In short, CF decried a woman’s New York Times Op-Ed on the demise of the glory days of travel which she apparently experienced as a flight attendant for TWA.   The Cranky Flier reckons that the changes that deregulation has brought on are what has made air travel affordable and to bring back the high service given in the 50’s, 60’s and early 70’s would deny that access to most of us.   Quite honestly, I do agree with him but I think a point was missed in Ann Hood’s Op Ed as well.

 

I’m pretty sure that Ms. Hood was decrying the loss of the great meals, comforting flight attendants and more correct behaviour but I think what prompted her Op Ed was actually a perceived lack of service on *any* level by airlines today.  I don’t think anyone realistically expects air travel to include 3 choices of meals, pillows and blankets and free cocktails anymore.  However, what causes people to continue to get upset is the generally poor nature of any service provided by most airlines.

 

I experienced that service as an airline brat from the late 1960’s to the early 1980’s and it really was pretty remarkable in many respects.  However, I don’t miss the Chateau Briand on Braniff flights between Dallas and Portland and I really don’t seem to miss the first class seat or the pillows or drinks.  OK, I do miss the seats but that is because I’m a 6’2″ man weighing 260lbs with long legs. 

 

What drives this perceived lack of service is airlines not keeping promises made when you buy a ticket.  Those promises are outlined by airline advertising which is quite good at showing a relaxing customer on an airplane enjoying a drink as he or she flies to their destination with the expectation that the airplane will be kept at comfortable temperature and will arrive on time.

 

Let’s look at what an airline passenger might enjoy from the time they decide to book a flight to the time they arrive back home from their trip.   First, they must book their flight online.  Most people not only don’t mind this, they prefer it these days.  However, none of us are amused when we attempt to book a flight online only to find the website overloaded from a fare sale or network disruption caused by weather.   If the customer tries to phone the airline to book they’ll be faced with long phone queues, surly reservations agents and the threat that their airline ticket is now going to cost them a bit more for booking via phone.

 

The customer is gratified at being able to check in early through the web but when they arrive at the airport they discover that checking in their suitcase requires them to stand in another long line in order that they might essentially check-in a second time so they can check a bag.  Even if they only have one bag, they’ll have to pay a fee to check it unless they are a road warrior with some sort of privileged status with the airlines’ frequent flier clubs.   Then they get to stand in yet another line while watching those same privileged fliers go through an express line with the TSA. 

 

Once at the gate, they’ll have to work to find an open seat to sit in while waiting for boarding call because aircraft are flying much more full these days and most gates at most airports aren’t designed to accommodate the loads that many airlines serve on their narrowbody aircraft.   At the boarding call, they get to watch those same privileged fliers board first onto the aircraft (even if they aren’t flying first class that day with their free upgrades they still get to board first) and then wait for their group to be called while some fellow passengers cheat and just board early anyway.  Since most customer service agents at the gate are unwilling to enforce the rules in many cases, these cheaters get away with that move.

 

If the passenger has a boarding call in the last 1 or 2 groups, they get to discover that all the other passengers have apparently carried their life’s possessions with them and occupied all the overhead luggage space.  If they say anything about the lack of space, some flight attendant will inform them that they might have to gate check their bag or put it under the seat in front of them.  Putting a bag under the seat in front of you hasn’t really been possible for adults since the early 80’s when airlines reduced seat pitch in coach from an accommodating 34 to 38 inches of space down to a tight 30 to 32 inches of space.   So, they put their coat in a crammed overhead bin and hand over their luggage to a surly flight attendant who is annoyed that they now have to catch the attention of ground personnel so the bag can be loaded in the luggage compartment.

 

Once seated, the passenger waits and waits for departure from the gate which is delayed a few minutes.  Finally after watching their watch for an additional 13 minutes, someone hurriedly closes the door and the pilots get a pushback.  Technically, the flight has left on time at this point.  Only the pushback results in them taxiiing slowly towards the runway where they run into a traffic jam of aircraft waiting to take off because most airports are woefully lacking in the infrastructure to accomodate the number of flights trying to depart at the same time. 

 

After another delay of 20 minutes, the aircraft takes off.  As it levels off, the surly flight attendants go to work immediately to serve their one beverage service during the 2 hour flight.  Now, the passenger knows that soft drinks (and virtually any other beverage) now costs money so they ask for water when it is their turn and find a surly flight attendant telling them that will be $3 for the half litre bottle of water they offer.   The passengers declines the water and tries to recline their seat only to discover that while the seat may recline, it reclines right into the knees of the passenger behind them who objects loudly. 

 

Upon arrival at their destination, the passenger collects their things and moves slowly towards the door.  In some cases, they now must wait on the airbridge for their gate checked luggage to be brought up to them and in other instances they must now trudge off to find the baggage carousel to collect their things.  Because these aircraft are flying so full, this amounts to another delay of 20 minutes or more. 

 

Once they have their baggage, they make their way to the curbside and take out their cell phone to call the person picking them up to tell them they are at the curbside now.  They have to do this because security no longer allows anyone inside the terminal and the airport management is now charging $7 to park in the parking structure for less than an hour to pick up their party.  

 

Go through that kind of experience each way and it is no wonder that passengers are decrying service from airlines left and right.  If you only experienced half of what I’ve described just now, you’ll loathe and hate the airline you just flew.  Not because you weren’t served a 3 course meal but because the airline who implicitly promised you a safe, relatively pleasant and on time experience didn’t even really pretend to try to deliver that promise. 

 

What people want is for an airline to be honest in what they’ll provide and to honestly deliver it with the possible exception of extraordinary circumstances.  Oh, there are a few airlines who do deliver on such things and they quite rightly also make a profit.  Southwest, jetBlue and Continental all come to mind as airlines that really do delivery almost every time.  However, for much of the US traveling public, those three airlines aren’t an option nearly as often as they would like. 

 

Indeed, the situation I just described is almost precisely what I experienced flying Airtran last year from Dallas to New York City.   It’s disappointing at the least and offensive in most respects.   Did I like the ticket price?  Sure.  But if you accurately described the more likely service scenario and then asked if I wanted to pay $50 more to just get where I wanted to go without that scene playing out, I’d happily dive into my wallet and hand over the cash.  

 

The problem isn’t that we’re addicted to the lowest fares possible.  We’re not.  We, the passengers, are too stupid to realize that the airlines aren’t really going to deliver on those implicit promises.  Like the co-dependent wife who keeps taking back her alcoholic husband, we keep going back to the airlines and expecting a different experience.  The truth is, if we would examine our last service experiences with various airlines and seek a different choice until we found an airline that treated us well, airlines would pay attention. 

 

Why?  Because it quite literally costs nothing extra to deliver what an airline generally promises today.  jetBlue, in particular, gets that concept and that is the biggest reason why they have succeeded flying from JFK airport in spite of all the known obstacles to flying from that airport.  So does Continental as they have huge hubs at weather delayed airports too but they understand that giving the customer the implicitly promised service leads to greater success on their part.  Southwest promises less service than either of those two airlines but has some of the highest customer satisfaction of any airline because they DO DELIVER ON WHAT THEY DO PROMISE. 

 

It isn’t the glory days of service that we miss.  It’s the constant disappointment we experience on airlines today that causes us to lament a lack of service.  It simply doesn’t exist for most passengers.  We are treated better, on average, at an inexpensive restaurant where we spend about $9 for for a meal than we are on an airline where we spend $200 or more for a flight.  Most airlines’ attitude is to chastise the passenger for complaining.  That’s the motivator for the glory days.   In the glory days, airlines didn’t act like you should be grateful just to have a seat on their aircraft.  They acted grateful that you chose them to make you trip on.

Filed under: Airline Service, Deregulation by ajax
1 Comment »

Last week an extended family of Muslim Indians were removed from an Airtran flight from Washington D.C. to Orlando.  It made the news in several places but here is an LA Times / Associated Press version of the events.  Scroll down to read the story.

 

I take issue with several details of this story actually.  First, this happened to US born US Citizens of this country.  That in itself is highly objectionable to me because it is clear that this issue formed as a function of their appearance and the assumed religious identification of these folks.  That is xenophobia. 

 

Second, the conversation they had which prompted the reaction by passengers was a conversation that I have personally heard  spoken on many flights and that includes a conversation between myself and my wife the last time we flew together to New York state.  It’s a conversation that many people have because the infrequent traveler wants to feel safe on an airplane.  Now, when my wife asked me about the “safest” part of an airplane to sit in, my own response was that I couldn’t imagine a “safe” place to sit on an airplane traveling hundreds of miles an hour about to hit the ground.  I also said that it’s foolish, in my opinion, to believe such a place exists on airplane that is going to crash.  No one objected to that conversation or many of the others I’ve overheard on airplanes since 2001.

 

Third, even if I concede it might have been something worth checking out, at the least, the FBI cleared this family to travel after speaking with them and the TSA cleared *all* of the luggage traveling on the airplane.   The FBI actually encouraged Airtran to carry on and, still, they were kept back.  Why?  Because airlines have decided to leave such a decision in the hands of the captain of an airplane and, at the same time, encourage pilots to *always* take the path that is most “sure” in such situations.  In other words, captains are simply encouraged to deny boarding to the suspect passengers on that immediate flight because it keeps everyone settled.

 

I take objection to that.  I would like to see a captain and his crew show some moral courage and simply indicate that such passengers, after being fully checked out, were OK to fly and they therefore were going to continue on the flight as every other paying passenger would expect to do so if it were them.   There was absolutely nothing to be afraid of whatsoever. 

 

Terrorists come in all shapes, sizes, religious denominations and physical appearances.  For us to accept that it is morally correct to seize upon someone as a potential terrorist simply because they are of the same race or religion as those terrorists of September 11, 2001 is stupid and ignorant of the way the world works. 

 

Want more proof?  The two people who initiated this concern with the flight crew were teenage girls.  I have a teenage girl of my own and I assure you that teenagers are *not* capable of making a credible judgement about someone who might be strange to them.  They are still kids, not adults and they certainly do not possess the life experience necessary to make such judgements.  That is why they are under the custody of adults, their parents. 

 

Airtran has most likely lost this Muslim Indian family as a set of customers for life.  By my count, that probably cost them about nine airfares to a destination that many families repeatedly visit.   All in favor of two teenage girls.   That was a foolish business decision. 

 

I have said it before and I will say it here.  The likelihood that a group of terrorists could take over an airplane, pilot it to a city such as New York City and crash one or more aircraft into a building after the tragedy of September 11, 2001 is so small that you have a far bigger risk of getting killed by lightening.   Do you wander out everyday wondering if this is your day to be killed by lightening?  The reason that attack was successful was because airlines have for years trained their staff to cooperate with a hijacker to get the plane to the ground where almost always the situation is resolved without deaths.  It was, until September 11, 2001, a very rational and very reasonable strategy.

 

Now it isn’t.  No plane will ever let someone or a group hijack an airplane in that manner ever again.  Not the passengers and not the flight crew.  Think I’m wrong?  Take a long look at how every other incident of someone losing control on an airplane or of someone attempting to breach a cockpit door has ended since flying began again in the post September 11 world.  Every person has been met with overwhelming force from passengers and flight crew and ultimately restrained. 

 

No, the next big attack won’t be by airplane.  It will be by another strategy that someone will use to take advantage of a security weakness either in another transportation mode (did you know that trains didn’t screen passengers and luggage like the airlines until the last year) or through a delivery method that is simply unpredictable at this time.  And it won’t necessarily be by Muslim terrorist either.  If you think I’m wrong, let me point you to the Oklahoma City bombing by a white Irish Catholic man named Timothy McVeigh.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

This was written earlier today by my friend, Dave “Rigger” Vick, who is currently touring with the musical, A Chorus Line.  He reads this blog and since he has been experiencing a variety of travel scenarios for the past several months, we talk often about the challenges in aircraft, airports and airlines. 

 

So here’s some wacky fun…

 

When you fly out of Lester Pearson International Airport in Toronto to a destination in the USA, once you’ve checked in and collected your
boarding pass you have to go through US Customs & Immigration
Pre-Screening, inside the airport, which you might think is still
inside the City of Toronto in the Province of Ontario in the nation of
Canada…

 

But you’d be wrong.  Very wrong…

 

The line to get up to the pre-screening agents is in fact Canada, and
you can enter and leave the line as much as you wish – and they tell
you that, too – *until* you have passed through the pre-screening and
been cleared by the USCI agent there.  Now you are *technically* no
longer in Canada, and if you need to return to the terminal for any
reason, you are required to go through Canadian Customs &
Immigration…

 

However, the next stop after the pre-screen, on the way to your gate,
is the Canadian equivalent of the TSA security screening checkpoint,
which is *not* run by US-TSA agents, but by their Canadian
counterparts, and since the USA does not permit foreign nationals to
run its securty apparatus, ergo, you are *technically* not on US
territory, either.

 

You’re not in Canada… You’re not in the US…  You’re in No-Man’s Land.

 

So what happens when you happen to be, say for the sake of discussion,
the assistant carpenter-slash-rigger of a touring Broadway show,
leaving Canada after 35 days to return to the US for your next
itinerary stop, with your knapsack full of necessary tools; say for
instance two Motorola walkie-talkies, a PLS laser, a Leica Disto laser
rangefinder, a roll of 3″ wide gaffer’s tape, a roll of 2″ wide clear
Jalar tape, an assortment of measuring tapes, a soapstone marker in
its holder, a Pentel paint marker, a laptop computer, and a 9v-powered
Screamin’ Meanie, and consequently the security agent manning the
X-ray machine sends up all sorts of red flags and bells and whistles?

 

You sweat, my friend… You sweat, is what you do.

 

That was about the most nerve-wracking thirty minutes of my life,
trying to explain to a very flint-eyed Canadian woman exactly why I
was carrying all of that drek through from YYZ to BWI at 6:30am this
past Monday. She wasn’t having it, but there was apparently nothing
she point to that was blatantly enough evidence to get me into
rubber-glove-up-the-butt screening, so she had to settle for making me
squirm.

 

 

Filed under: Airports, Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

Every year I have someone in my circle of friends and family decry how risky it is to check baggage and everyone has an unsubstantiated story of lost luggage.  While it is true that luggage can get lost, it happens far less often than is ever portrayed.  I have been traveling by airline since I was 2 years old and my luggage was “lost” twice.  At one point in my life, I traveled more as a teenager than most seasoned road warriors of today.  Statistically, you are very unlikely to have a misplaced bag and if you do experience lost luggage, it generally can be available in as little as 6 hours. 

 

Some time ago, I wrote this POST about luggage.  It is a collection of strategies to mitigate against lost luggage.  Read it and practice it and you’ll be in a far better position to experience a happy holiday trip.  Because of baggage fees on most airlines, many recommend shipping your gifts rather than checking a bag.  In some respects, I agree.  However, it may be *cheaper* to take a bag along with gifts one way.

 

Many people have nesting suitcases.  Take a large one with your gifts and pay the fee to carry all your gifts.  Pack your clothes in the smaller one.  Once you get to your destination, hand your gifts out and pack your clothes suitcase inside the larger one and then check that back to home on your return trip.  You can also use a softside duffle bag that you can compress to fit inside your clothes suitcase for your return.   If you travel with someone else, see if you can pack one suitcase to check, one bag to carry *both* of your carry-on items and use one other small bag to carry gifts as a carry on. 

 

If you are carrying gifts, it is best to leave them unwrapped.  The TSA may well want to look at the item, especially if it is an electronic gift and you don’t want that gift wrap messed up do you?  Do yourself a favor and put them in your luggage in a manner that lets the TSA look at them and put them back neatly.  Use a TSA luggage lock as recommended in this post.  Such a lock allows the TSA to open your baggage, do their search and relock your luggage.  Most theft actually occurs while the airline is handling your bags, not the TSA.  A TSA lock keeps people honest.  Let’s face it, it’s a lot easier to just move to a bag without a lock than it is to defeat yours where you might be spotted.

 

Identify your luggage.  Put tags on the inside and outside of the bag.  If you’re using one of the Ubiquitous Black Roll On suitcases, mark it with a colorful strap of some kind so you *know* it is your bag coming into the baggage claim and so others know it is *not* their bag.  

 

Best of all, if you know you’ll be checking your bag, get to the airport a bit earlier than usual so that the bag(s) have time to move through the system and to the aircraft.   If you must connect to another flight in another city, try to schedule those connection with 1 1/2 hour of connection time or more.  That gives you some lee way to make a flight if you are late and it lets your bags make that same flight if you are late.   Isn’t it better to spend an hour in the airport reading than it is to have to return to an airport to claim a lost bag a day later?

 

 

Filed under: Travel Hints by ajax
No Comments »

If you are worried about losing your luggage on a trip, here is a travel hint that virtually everyone can do easily.

 

Got a digital camera?  Take a photo of your suitcase (front and side view) in the sunlight.  Make a note of the brand and, if available, model of your suitcase.  (You’d be surprised at how few people know this stuff.)  Then print out your luggage photos on a piece of paper with your luggage make and model.  Put something that will help identify it visually on the outside of the bag.  An odd coloured strap or tag would do.  Put a copy of your travel itinerary in a plastic sleeve INSIDE your luggage.

 

Buy a TSA luggage lock.  Almost everyone thinks you can’t lock your luggage anymore.  Wrong.  Many stores such as Brookstone, The Container Store, etc sell a TSA Lock.  The TSA luggage lock can be opened by TSA personnel only with a special key.  This makes your luggage less of a target for dishonest baggage handlers.   I own 3 of these locks and I’ve noticed that when I use them, it seems like the TSA very rarely goes through my luggage as well. 

 

Carry your luggage info with you on the airplane.  When you land, particularly in a foreign country, if your luggage is lost, a baggage agent will kiss you and praise you for having  photos, description and identifying marks for him to go by as well as a tag sd airport transport.  Make their job easy and they’ll find your bag quickly.

 

Tens of thousands of pieces of luggage that were separated from their owners at London Heathrow Airport last spring have been either sold or burned beause there was NO WAY OF IDENTIFYING THE BAG AND RETURNING IT TO THE CUSTOMER.  This luggage had no bag tags and nothing inside the luggage to tell anyone who it belonged to. 

 

 

Filed under: Travel Hints by ajax
No Comments »