Security - why needed for transit?

[Aus ATC]

Just reflecting on recent experience. I transited through Munich recently and was not subject to a security check - I think that was my first experience internationally of an airport "trusting" the security of the preceding ports, rather than subjecting passengers to an additional security check during transit. It would be nice to think that once cleared for travel, that clearance continues to apply until leaving the "airside zone" world wide - as seemed to be the case at MUC. Not applicable at places like SIN though, where only each gate, and not the concourse, can be considered "sterile".

 

[Himeno]

Just reflecting on recent experience. I transited through Munich recently and was not subject to a security check - I think that was my first experience internationally of an airport "trusting" the security of the preceding ports, rather than subjecting passengers to an additional security check during transit. It would be nice to think that once cleared for travel, that clearance continues to apply until leaving the "airside zone" world wide - as seemed to be the case at MUC. Not applicable at places like SIN though, where only each gate, and not the concourse, can be considered "sterile".

SIN T4 is all airside. You clear security in the same process when clearing departure immigration and have to go through security to get on the bus from T1/2/3.
There will likely never be a global security system. There will be blocks where it's all a single airside transit such as around the EU, but there is no way everyone will agree to the same standards world wide and trust everyone to keep to those standards.

There have been proposals for such a system, but even after 19 years of talking about it through the IACO, no one agrees.

 

[Aus ATC]

SIN T4 is all airside. You clear security in the same process when clearing departure immigration and have to go through security to get on the bus from T1/2/3.
There will likely never be a global security system. There will be blocks where it's all a single airside transit such as around the EU, but there is no way everyone will agree to the same standards world wide and trust everyone to keep to those standards.

There have been proposals for such a system, but even after 19 years of talking about it through the IACO, no one agrees.

I wasn't aware of SIN T4. The interesting thing with MUC was that I was an ex EU arrival (from SIN) with no transit checks. It kind of makes sense within the EU - arguably no different to a domestic flight in Aus. I think you are right - it is about "trust" or perception thereof.

 

[oz_mark]

SIN T4 is all airside. You clear security in the same process when clearing departure immigration and have to go through security to get on the bus from T1/2/3.

The 'interesting' thing about T4, is that they do security checks on passengers coming off incoming aircraft sometimes (been there, done that!)

 

[Hvr]

I remember transiting at DXB and we were screened upon arrival and departure.

 

[dajop]

The 'interesting' thing about T4, is that they do security checks on passengers coming off incoming aircraft sometimes (been there, done that!)

These are not (airline/airport) security checks. I don’t know what they’re looking for but I assume it’s for security of the republic or looking for illicit imports, money launderers etc.

 

[Aus ATC]

I remember transiting at DXB and we were screened upon arrival and departure.

Strange - but was that the 'special' screening inbound flights to Australia enjoy - don't get me started on that.....

 

[juddles]

Security is a complex thing. It involves many factors. Experience, intel, new theories, relic practices, cost-saving attempts, technological innovation, local issues, airport design, evolving threats, safety aspects, economic aspects, legal aspects, etc etc etc.

There is always a reason for a particular practice, even if this reason is not obvious to pax.

 

[Pushka]

Security is a complex thing. It involves many factors. Experience, intel, new theories, relic practices, cost-saving attempts, technological innovation, local issues, airport design, evolving threats, safety aspects, economic aspects, legal aspects, etc etc etc.

There is always a reason for a particular practice, even if this reason is not obvious to pax.

And sometimes that reason has little to do with actual security in the traditional sense.

 

[serfty]

The 'interesting' thing about T4, is that they do security checks on passengers coming off incoming aircraft sometimes (been there, done that!)

I have seen this at T1 (not me, I went past a gate where they were checking everyone coming off a flight).

 

[kpc]

Flying from Dps to Sin a few years ago resulted in a security check on arrival at Changi

 

[Forg]

These are not (airline/airport) security checks. I don’t know what they’re looking for but I assume it’s for security of the republic or looking for illicit imports, money launderers etc.

... chewing gum bootleggers ...

 

[Himeno]

And sometimes that reason has little to do with actual security in the traditional sense.

ie, 90% of TSAs existence.

 

[Hvr]

Strange - but was that the 'special' screening inbound flights to Australia enjoy - don't get me started on that.....

Both ways, to and from Australia.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Flying from Dps to Sin a few years ago resulted in a security check on arrival at Changi

Had same from DPS and also same regularly from MNL - but TBH security screening just does not bother me - what really gets up my nose are those ‘explosive tests’ dep MEL - for some reason it just seems the people conducting them have to absolutely grandstand - you cannot even enter PVG or PEK terminals without explosive tests but it is hardly noticeable

 

[harvyk]

I do believe that it's part trust of other countries, and part the fact that if something happens on an aircraft departing a country, then lawyers will be circling the departing country, even if it turns out it was only an in-transit pax.

I do believe there have been bombing of aircraft where the attackers went through security in country A, and yet the bomb went off between country B and C. (Although I'm not exactly game to start google searching that to confirm a week out from a trip to the US )

 

[Pushka]

I do believe that it's part trust of other countries, and part the fact that if something happens on an aircraft departing a country, then lawyers will be circling the departing country, even if it turns out it was only an in-transit pax.

I do believe there have been bombing of aircraft where the attackers went through security in country A, and yet the bomb went off between country B and C. (Although I'm not exactly game to start google searching that to confirm a week out from a trip to the US )

I am very wary of what I search for now as we depart in four weeks.