Replies

a) No aircraft operator may use any person as a Ground Security Coordinator unless, within the preceding 12-calendar months, that person has satisfactorily completed the security training as specified in the aircraft operator's security program.

That particular piece harks back to the December 5, 1972 emergency regulation which required the airlines to put screeners in place within 30 days. It was in response to two separate incidents that occured in October and November of that year when convicted felons stormed an Eastern Airlines plane in Houston and a Southern Airlines plane in Birmingham, Alabama. The "fleeing felon" decision caused the airlines to use contractors as screeners because the airlines weren't equipped to deal with hiring process. Flip 30 years later and you can see that the contractor's, looking at their bottom line, deemphasized training and sent the screeeners out to the concourse. Subsequently, they didn't catch the box cutters and knives used in 911.

Anymore questions?

Furthermore, Rod, the security coordinator is an airline employee while the screeners are not. The decision to create a separate level of administration was a result of Lockerbie.

Yes, the same question I have posed numerous times. The original conversation that you started out insulting me on for not having memorized FAR 108 was whether or not the airport overreacted. You stated that FAR 108 was relevent to that. Please post which section of FAR 108 addresses whether or not the airport overreacted. You have avoided this question numerous times. So please answer it this time, or admit that you were just throwing around regulations and were not prepared to be called on it.

That particular piece harks back to the December 5, 1972 emergency regulation which required the airlines to put screeners in place within 30 days. It was in response to two separate incidents that occured in October and November of that year when convicted felons stormed an Eastern Airlines plane in Houston and a Southern Airlines plane in Birmingham, Alabama. The "fleeing felon" decision caused the airlines to use contractors as screeners because the airlines weren't equipped to deal with hiring process. Flip 30 years later and you can see that the contractor's, looking at their bottom line, deemphasized training and sent the screeeners out to the concourse. Subsequently, they didn't catch the box cutters and knives used in 911

That's nice. But you did not answer the question. The question was not "what is the history of this regulation", the question was how is that relevent to the discussion of whether or not the airport overreacted.

As a bit of background, you stated that we were all unintelligent for not know what FAR 108 said, while we were discussing whether the airport overreacted. When I asked which part of 108 was relevent to that, you at first refused, and later said "all of it". Well, how is the above section relevent as to whether or not the airport overreacted, or were you just being a blowhard when you said "all of it"?

Subsequently, they didn't catch the box cutters and knives used in 911

None of the things I have seen proposed for on the ground would make a difference in even the last set of hijackings. Anyone with a bit of thought could MAKE bladed weapons while ON the plane, much less there being all kinds of things that could be taken onto the plane that are undetectable, or easily disguisable. Any proposal that does not take into account sufficient tools to deal with this level of weaponry is merely show.

Clearly most of the announced security procedures put in place after 9-11 are only to give the impression that something is being done...not an actual aid to security. Also, most are easily avoidable while complying with the stated checks.