Domestic flights an 'easy target' for terrorists

[Hvr]

Among the measures Mr Carmody wants introduced are cross-referencing of all passengers' identities to their checked luggage and names on tickets, and the introduction of security screening at regional airports.


He also calls for a profiling system to record when, where and how a ticket was bought, a traveller's flying history, and information on luggage, to identify potential threats.


''Combining this profiling with a system where passengers interact with staff trained to spot suspicious behaviour at an airport counter would provide the best level of security and could be supported with improved technology.''

I hope this doesn't spell the end of hassle free flying in Australia and the employment of thousands of incompetent jobsworths like those in the USA's TSA.

 

[Mal]

Oh dear - it does seem like someone has studied the TSA way of doing things and wants it implemented here.

How surprising is it that Michael Carmody runs a security consulting business and has such good ideas...

Domestic Liquid bans would be a pita, but at least then they would be standardised across all flights. Security screening for Dash-8 type flights - again a pita, but would ensure standardisation.

Ensuring that bag+customer are matched... I thought we already had that?

Name matching against ID is useless due to the ease of getting forged identification. Data mining and matching against previous flying history/ticket purchase method etc - useless as anyone up to no good would simply know what triggers alerts and modify their behaviour.

 

[samh004]

Name matching against ID is useless due to the ease of getting forged identification.

Not to mention the rarity of having your details checked anyway. I rarely get asked for my ID.

Now if only we had some devout Christians ready to go on a crusade and terrorise the terrorists. Maybe then they’d understand.

 

[dajop]

Security screening for Dash-8 type flights - again a pita, but would ensure standardisation.

Maybe Q400's, don't see why ERJ's require screening, but not Q400's - maybe the fuel? But the day we start doing screening of SAAB flights is the day we lose the plot. If we are going to spend bucks enhancing security, I'd rather it go into suburban rail than a SAAB with 34 passengers on board (and a huge amount of fuel by the time it reaches the major city).

 

[drron]

Maybe Q400's, don't see why ERJ's require screening, but not Q400's - maybe the fuel? But the day we start doing screening of SAAB flights is the day we lose the plot. If we are going to spend bucks enhancing security, I'd rather it go into suburban rail than a SAAB with 34 passengers on board (and a huge amount of fuel by the time it reaches the major city).

Stop knocking the battered Sabs.I like them,for short flights.I dont see a train doing the MEL-BTW route:shock:OK excuse my dyslexia-MEL-BWT.

 

[Dave Noble]

Stop knocking the battered Sabs.I like them,for short flights.I dont see a train doing the MEL-BTW route

I don't expect that there are many Saabs doing Melbourne to Borneo

 

[Mal]

Maybe Q400's, don't see why ERJ's require screening, but not Q400's - maybe the fuel? But the day we start doing screening of SAAB flights is the day we lose the plot.

Don't get me wrong ... I don't like the various security screening that takes place, and certainly dislike the liquid rules. I actually agree that trains are as good a target as planes.

However, it is very frustrating to tell people that "SYD-MEL" you can take what you want liquid wise - unless you are departing from the Intl terminal, "MEL-LAX" you are restricted to 100ml bottles. etc etc.

The same goes with people who fly say GLT-BNE and are able to carry nail clippers, and then have them confiscated because they are actually flying GLT-BNE-SYD.

Some standardisation would help.

(And yes, I realise what that means for a person who flies LAX-SYD, buys duty free booze, then attempts to fly SYD-BNE and has it confiscated. However, I'm sure that some sanity *might* prevail. )

 

[Dave Noble]

I find it strange that the domestic security is so lax compared to international and that someone can book a flight in any name and not have to prove who he is. I cannot see why a domestic 767 is less of a target than an international flight

Dave

 

[harvyk]

You may find that our level of security screening at int airports has more to do with keeping the US happy than actual security.

If it really was a credible threat that more than 100ml of liquids would be used to blow up an aussie plane, you can be sure that we'd be screened for it for dom flights as well.

The problem is that some flights leaving from aussie int terminals will enter US airspace... Could you imagine the uproar if a plane leaving an aussie terminal was blown up over US airspace? (think post Christmas day)

Basically we're just covering our cough for the US when it comes to int flights...

 

[BlueAU]

Not to mention the rarity of having your details checked anyway. I rarely get asked for my ID.

Don't need to show ID (license etc) if you show your QFF card, that is acceptable ID ... I learnt !

 

[NM]

Its all about perception more than reality :-|

 

[oz_mark]

I find it strange that the domestic security is so lax compared to international and that someone can book a flight in any name and not have to prove who he is. I cannot see why a domestic 767 is less of a target than an international flight

Does it really matter who is flying? Or is the real security issue about what they are carrying on board?

 

[turtlemichael]

The incontrovertible truth from Carmondy's statement is that the moment something dreadful happens on the domestic network the recriminations will fly and we'll have restrictions tighter than anywhere else.

 

[one9]

Does it really matter who is flying? Or is the real security issue about what they are carrying on board?

Exactly. Some people so easily get a false sense of security. Who cares who is flying? All that matters is that people don't have any weapons or bombs or dangerous goods.

Security needs to be proportionate. Why make security so crazy on planes when there is so little security on trains and other public places?

I think the TSA is more of a symbolic thing for Americans than an actual security thing. A tragic event happened on 9/11 and Americans want to feel like they are safe, regardless of whether or not the things done actually provide greater security or not.

 

[dajop]

Some standardisation would help.

Yes but at what cost? Suddenly you have to introduce scanners, staffing etc at places like Moree, Griffith, Broken Hill, Burnie, Devonport, Gladstone, Narrandera, Mudgee, Narrabri, Armidale, Moruya, Merimbula etc,. Personally I think in terms of risk (ie probability x consequences) I'd rather money be spent on suburban rail. And frankly, if someone wants to maximise damage, and reap maximum amount of havoc, there's much bigger targets out there than a Saab flying from Merimbula to Melbourne carrying 24 passengers and 3 crew.

I like other think it's all to do with perceptions, rather than real risk.

And done get me started on name matching etc, load of rubbish. I agree it's all about what gets carried on board, because quite frankly if someone is going to pull off a sophisticated, coordinate attack using airliners again, frankly producing a fake drivers licence is probably the easiest part of the whole plot.

 

[harvyk]

Does it really matter who is flying?

Actually it does... When the watchlists are kept upto date the "who" is as important as the what they are or could be carrying...

For example, if someone is known to authorities, they can ensure that the person is properly searched each and everytime they hop onto a plane rather than simply hoping that the person of interest gets selected at random the time they try to do something.

The only problem is when the lists are not kept upto date, and \ or the person gets mixed up with someone else with the same name.

That all said, my Grandfather (who knows about security, trust me on that) has told me about all sorts of great unobtrusive tools and techniques which they did \ had back in the 70's \ 80's and yet we now 20 to 30 years later are still going unused.

 

[auriga]

Please don't let domestic flying here be like the US!!!

 

[one9]

Actually it does... When the watchlists are kept upto date the "who" is as important as the what they are or could be carrying...

Whilst the idea has some merit in theory, it is a bad idea because if the security relies on identifying "known" suspects, then it shows that the security is not very good at all.

 

[samh004]

Don't need to show ID (license etc) if you show your QFF card, that is acceptable ID ... I learnt !

Last year when flying JQ I didn’t show any ID or my QFF card and had no problems checking in.

 

[pauly7]

Last year when flying JQ I didn’t show any ID or my QFF card and had no problems checking in.

A wink at the check in chick at DJ is enough for them

I think we all know all the major AU airlines aren't super tight (cough) on ID...