Why is security different at domestic airports.

Forums › Travel (planes, train, cruise) › Why is security different at domestic airports.

1 | 2

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2123772 11-Nov-2018 21:56

Mspec:

I don't get the because it only has x people you don't need security but if it has over that it doesn't

What does the ATR mean sorry don't know is it the type of plane.

I comes down to the aircraft size and also its capability, i.e. how much fuel might it be carrying, and how much range it has. In other words could it be hijacked and flown to Australia to commit a terrorist act there. Also it would be very expensive to have security at every provincial airport. Therefore it was decided the most practical choice was to screen jet services only.

However as other have posted this security thing is a pretty pointless exercise. It is a feel good, waste of the travelling public's money.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Goosey

2833 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2123784 11-Nov-2018 23:39

I think it comes down to airport really.

Wellington is small. ill planned out....should really close down and move outta town. If government wasnt in Wgtn, then there wouldnt be any need for an airport really close.

Most other airports (even ZQN), has a regional gate without security.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2123897 12-Nov-2018 08:46

DarthKermit:

I recall travelling from Chch domestic to Palmy in 2005. Had to go through a metal detector before boarding.

Fast forward to 2017 and travelling from the new Chch domestic terminal to Palmy. No check what-so-ever of my boarding pass, no metal detector. Go figure.

Christchurch only had a single departures area for all gates in 2005 so everybody was screened at the centralised screening.

This was a massive security issue for a number of years as all passenger arrivals into CHC regardless of aircraft type were mixed in the sterile airside area with departing passengers. It means unscreened ATR arrivals from other airports could mingle with screened jet pax departing CHC.

Now CHC has all the regional departures in separate from jet gates and screening.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2123899 12-Nov-2018 08:49

amiga500:

Because in NZ we have a habit of doing things in an incomplete way. American tourists are amazed (horrified?) at the lax security at our domestic airports.

I don't know why they would/should be. I regard security at our airports here as far stricter and thorough than and the multiple TSA screenings I go through every year. I still don't understand why they think they effectively set the rules when it comes to "security", yet are so poor themselves.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2123905 12-Nov-2018 08:56

Mspec:

Sort of went way off topic in my rambling but why do you have no security to go through in CHCH but you have security you have to go through in Wellington.

To summarise all the other posts...

Security screening is not required on turboprop aircraft in NZ (the law says aircraft less than 90 seats but for commercial operators these are all turboprops). You didn't require screening at CHC because you flew on an ATR76 to WLG.

No screening is required at WLG for 99% of turboprop flights except for the exception of gate 15 which is still used at WLG during busy periods. The vast majority of CHC flights all leave from gate 18/19.

As gate 15 is at the end of the jet pier it means you have to clear security at the end of the pier to get through to the gate. Arrivals at that gate also have to use the bus to get to the terminal since you can't mix unscreened arriving pax with screened departing pax in the sterile airside area.

PolicyGuy

1727 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2123973 12-Nov-2018 10:34

irongarment:

[snip]

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors*.

[snip]

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors, and the understanding by aircrew and passengers alike that they won't be unlocked no matter what the threat.

This is what makes so much of the security theatre at airports such a complete waste of time and effort. There is no way a 9/11 style hijacking can work anymore. In fact there have been at least a couple of instances where a deranged individual has tried that stunt and been beaten insensible by passengers who no longer believe it's best to sit quiet and wait for the authorities to resolve the problem on landing.

alasta

6706 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#2123976 12-Nov-2018 10:43

PolicyGuy:

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors, and the understanding by aircrew and passengers alike that they won't be unlocked no matter what the threat.

This is what makes so much of the security theatre at airports such a complete waste of time and effort. There is no way a 9/11 style hijacking can work anymore. In fact there have been at least a couple of instances where a deranged individual has tried that stunt and been beaten insensible by passengers who no longer believe it's best to sit quiet and wait for the authorities to resolve the problem on landing.

Even with a secure cockpit you'd have to think that there could be a very bad outcome if someone goes berserk with a knife or other similar weapon inside the passenger cabin.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

irongarment

280 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#2124014 12-Nov-2018 12:02

alasta:
PolicyGuy:

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors, and the understanding by aircrew and passengers alike that they won't be unlocked no matter what the threat.

This is what makes so much of the security theatre at airports such a complete waste of time and effort. There is no way a 9/11 style hijacking can work anymore. In fact there have been at least a couple of instances where a deranged individual has tried that stunt and been beaten insensible by passengers who no longer believe it's best to sit quiet and wait for the authorities to resolve the problem on landing.

Even with a secure cockpit you'd have to think that there could be a very bad outcome if someone goes berserk with a knife or other similar weapon inside the passenger cabin.

Well, as I said, except when it isn't:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

But, in your example, if someone goes berserk with a knife it's a very bad outcome for some people, but not everyone. Which is all we can hope for really.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2124017 12-Nov-2018 12:03

PolicyGuy:

irongarment:

[snip]

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors*.

[snip]

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors, and the understanding by aircrew and passengers alike that they won't be unlocked no matter what the threat.

This is what makes so much of the security theatre at airports such a complete waste of time and effort. There is no way a 9/11 style hijacking can work anymore. In fact there have been at least a couple of instances where a deranged individual has tried that stunt and been beaten insensible by passengers who no longer believe it's best to sit quiet and wait for the authorities to resolve the problem on landing.

So you think we should get rid of airport security so people are free to take dangerous goods onto aircraft that could harm other passengers, or even worse toxic chemicals that could take out everybody on the plane?

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2124223 12-Nov-2018 15:22

Thanks for all the reply's learnt a lot I did not know about our airports.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

PolicyGuy

1727 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2124325 12-Nov-2018 17:16

sbiddle:

PolicyGuy:

The single most effective deterrent to plane hijacking is lockable cockpit doors, and the understanding by aircrew and passengers alike that they won't be unlocked no matter what the threat.

This is what makes so much of the security theatre at airports such a complete waste of time and effort. There is no way a 9/11 style hijacking can work anymore. In fact there have been at least a couple of instances where a deranged individual has tried that stunt and been beaten insensible by passengers who no longer believe it's best to sit quiet and wait for the authorities to resolve the problem on landing.

So you think we should get rid of airport security so people are free to take dangerous goods onto aircraft that could harm other passengers, or even worse toxic chemicals that could take out everybody on the plane?

People are allowed to take dangerous goods onto every other form of public transport, and that seems to work OK the vast majority of the time. Backpack bombs blew up on London Underground trains, but the UK authorities seem to have decided that intelligent policing is the appropriate mitigation for that, not patting down every Underground passenger and X-raying their bags.

People are stopped from taking completely non-dangerous goods such as nailclippers onto aeroplanes so they can't use them to threaten a cabin crew member into letting the putative assailant into the cockpit to effect a hijack. Except that just won't happen now, for the reasons I mentioned.
With very, very few exceptions, the Airport Security Theatre serves only to address 'threats' that no longer exist, and not the ones that will still work:

If you really wish to bomb an aeroplane, you get one of the hundreds of air-side employees who never go through screening to plant what looks like a can of soft drink somewhere inconspicuous - like tucked in behind the rearmost seat, as on the EgyptAir flight that crashed in the Sinai. Two hundred grams of high explosive planted in the right place will bring any airliner down.
If you want to cause the maximum airline-related terror, get one of your dupes to blow himself or herself up in the milling crowd at the security checkpoint in the airport building. With the tiniest bit of reconnaissance and planning, you should be able to kill several planeloads of passengers at the same time. For some reason, nobody's tried this yet, most fortunately.

As for noxious chemicals, the real danger there is from faulty engine oil seals leaking nerve toxins into the cabin air through the bleed air system that provides cabin pressurisation and air conditioning. Feel free to Google "Aerotoxic syndrome"

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#2124343 12-Nov-2018 18:09

PolicyGuy:

People are stopped from taking completely non-dangerous goods such as nailclippers onto aeroplanes so they can't use them to threaten a cabin crew member into letting the putative assailant into the cockpit to effect a hijack.

Just FYI nail clippers are permitted in carry on luggage.

Ge0rge

2055 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2124349 12-Nov-2018 18:34

sbiddle:
PolicyGuy:

People are stopped from taking completely non-dangerous goods such as nailclippers onto aeroplanes so they can't use them to threaten a cabin crew member into letting the putative assailant into the cockpit to effect a hijack.

Just FYI nail clippers are permitted in carry on luggage.

And a small pocket knife, complete with blade is perfectly fine - but absolutely no to a small 10mm ring / open spanner - go figure?

onyxnz

8 posts

Wannabe Geek

#2127862 16-Nov-2018 11:34

I got caught out once. After flying many times between AKL - NPR, I got used to going through without security scans etc. Then one day I have to fly AirNZ from WLG - AKL. I wandered through with my trusty Leatherman still attached to my belt. O dear. They graciously sent it on a subsequent flight, where as I waited in AKL I could pick it up from the luggage.

Yet when my 10 year old son forgot he was carrying his 1-inch pocket knife, and going through Dubai, they confiscated that thing without empathy, and binned it. No amount of pleading helped, they didn't give a $#@&.

So thank you, Kiwis, for being humane, despite the "laws".

1 | 2