TSA Wants You To Keep Your Seat, and Your Hands In Sight

An anonymous reader excerpts from an AP story as carried by Yahoo News about changes stemming from yesterday's foiled bombing attempt of a Northwest Airlines flight: "Some airlines were telling passengers on Saturday that new government security regulations prohibit them from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing. The regulations are a response to a suspected terrorism incident on Christmas Day. Air Canada said in a statement that new rules imposed by the Transportation Security Administration limit on-board activities by passengers and crew in US airspace. ... Flight attendants on some domestic flights are informing passengers of similar rules. Passengers on a flight from New York to Tampa Saturday morning were also told they must remain in their seats and couldn't have items in their laps, including laptops and pillows." The TSA's list of prohibited items doesn't seem to have changed in the last day, though.

Comments

Oh, look!

[NeutronCowboy]

Another reason for me not to fly. And another Al Qaeda success in disrupting the US economy and society beyond their wildest dreams.

Re:Oh, look!

[WGFCrafty]

I think he means "minor annoyance," as in an attempt to change our everyday life (flying isn't every day for most people). A perspective on the stability of government, not a humanist perspective.

Kinda like the quote which is often misattributed to Stalin:

The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.

I don't know who actually said the above phrase, according to wikiquotes: "Mustering Most Memorable Quips" by Julia Solovyova, in The Moscow Times (28 October 1997) states: Russian historians have no record of the lines, "Death of one man is a tragedy. Death of a million is a statistic," commonly attributed by English-language dictionaries to Josef Stalin. Discussing the book by Konstantin Dushenko ( ) Dictionary of Modern Quotations ( : 4300 , , , ).

Re:Oh, look!

[TheLink]

Agh. Mod me down, I can't read.

Re:Oh, look!

[Osty]

First, IANAGAP (I am not a general aviation pilot) but I've considered getting my license and I paid pretty close attention when a friend was working on getting hers.

How much did it cost to get lessons and a license? Was it comparable to the requirements for driving a car legally?

I'm sure it depends on your area, but it also depends on what licenses you need. Figure $3-5000 for a visual-only license, give or take a grand or so. Definitely not the same as getting a car license.

Also, doesn't a private plane cost a lot more to buy than a car?

Depends on the plane and the car you're comparing. Obviously buying your own Learjet is going to be a lot more expensive than buying a used Honda. On the other hand, a used Cessna is much more affordable than a Bugatti Veyron. Most pilots don't own their own plane but instead own a portion of a plane with a number of other people. Unless you expect to fly each and every weekend, there's no reason not to get in on a co-op ownership rather than buying your own.

Re:Oh, look!

[msobkow]

The Nazis gained their power by inciting paranoia over a fake "terrorist" attack.

The Nazis leveraged the paranoia of the population to come down on scapegoats (Jews and immigrants vs. Muslims and immigrants.)

There are endless similarities between the way the politicians of Nazi Germany manipulated the law and the population and the way the US is doing the same. If you prefer to stick your head up your arse and claim it's not so, that's your prerogative, but it won't change the facts or the similarities.

The terrorists won -- the US is now the land of paranoia, over-regulation, and overzealous government agencies.

Re:Oh, look!

[notseamus]

Europe has locked down it's train stations a bit, especially London, and in the UK, largely, you won't find a bin in a train station. In Glasgow Central you have to throw your rubbish on the floor, and someone sweeps it up.

Airports are a different matter. Airlines used the one bag security restriction to limit people to one piece of hand luggage permanently (maybe this was only a UK restriction, and it's been largely lifted now, but I think it's still in place in some airports), so you can't even bring a handbag and a shopping bag, or a handbag and a piece of luggage aboard the plane (it does seem to unfairly target women).

There's also the restrictions on luggage, photos at the gates, searches etc, but it's been years since I flew to America, so I don't know how bad it is in comparison.

Elsewhere in Europe, it's not as bad, but the UK is Americanised in more ways than one.

Re:Oh, look!

[digitig]

Europe has locked down it's train stations a bit, especially London, and in the UK, largely, you won't find a bin in a train station. In Glasgow Central you have to throw your rubbish on the floor, and someone sweeps it up.

That happened long before 9/11 -- it was officially a response to Irish republican terrorism, although many of us suspect it was to save the cost of emptying the bins (bomb resistant bins were already available at the time the bins were withdrawn).

Therein lies a reason for a difference between the European and US responses, of course. Europe has lived with terrorism for centuries, from Guy Fawkes to Basque separatists so we're a bit more stoic about it. That doesn't stop politicians trying to deprive the public of more freedoms, but it makes it harder for them.

Re:Oh, look!

[Faluzeer]

snip...
the IRA, seeing its major source of funds dry up, became a lot more willing to negotiate.

Hmmm

Credit where credit is due, the republican movement had shown they were willing to negotiate several years before 9/11. The good friday peace agreement occurred in april 1998, negotiations had started under the previous conservative government led by John Major.

Re:Oh, look!

[gbjbaanb]

The notion of using airplanes, and civilian airliners at that, as flying bombs was also not a possibility that was in the popular consciousness, not even as a plot element in an action movie.

Steven King did it first in The Running Man, popularised by Arnold "I'll be back" Schwarzenegger in the film that predictably changed the ending to a happy one, and not the original that had an airliner fly into the TV network's HQ.

Books. Better than movies, since.. well, forever.

Re:Oh, look!

[mother_reincarnated]

Except general aviation is extremely dangerous, statistically speaking- something like 1%* of GA planes crash per year.

That's a huge trade off of convenience for safety.

*(2k crashes out of 186k planes in 1996 from http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/155/5/398)

Re:Oh, look!

[Rich0]

For a small plane I'd expect a few hundred mile effective range. They could actually fly upwards of 600 miles on a single tank, but you need to factor in reserves, hold time, wind, etc. You don't want to plan to land on empty.

On the other hand, if you've marked off a few small airfields along the way a fueling stop doesn't really take all that long - you plan to have to hold in case something odd comes up, but you're not going to need to do that in some field in the middle of farmland.

Gas prices seem to be about $4.25/gal right now, and small planes hold about 50 gallons. You'll definitely pay more in gas than you would for a car, but that really is one of the smallest expenses associated with a plane.

What hasn't been mentioned in this thread is the maintenance. Figure that it will cost you upwards of $80/hr to fly your plane. You can pay $100/hr or so and rent (often with limitations on being able to just take the plane somewhere), or you can buy and you end up with a "cheap hourly rate" coupled with periodic major expenses. YOU CANNOT SKIMP ON MAINTENANCE. Planes are very safe if properly cared for, and proper care costs money - at various intervals based on operational time you need to have it taken care of.

Then you have to factor in buying the plane in the first place - it costs quite a bit of money for something that you won't actually use all that often.

Unless you're up in the air all the time or just have to have your own plane, the best bet by far is a flying club of some kind. Essentially these are planes owned by lots of people, so that the overhead is shared efficiently. It still isn't what I'd call cheap, but it is fairly reasonable and you can usually reserve planes for longer periods of time. If you're doing rentals forget actually using a plane to go someplace, unless you plan to go, visit somebody for a few hours, and come home.

Note that I'm not a pilot but I've been investigating this stuff with interest - I could easily see myself going this route someday and I'm reasonably proficient on simulators now. (The /. crew types can easily benefit from simulators as they give you a chance to practice quite a few things for almost nothing. I have no illusions that they're a replacement for real-world experience, but if you fly them following real-world procedures you can get the hang of stuff like instrumentation and crosswinds without paying for time.)

Re:Oh, look!

[Khyber]

Stephen King wasn't even the first.

JAPANESE KAMIKAZE PILOTS, WORLD WAR II.

Wow, how easily world history slips the minds of the people.

Re:Oh, look!

[winwar]

Hell, in 1945 a B-25 Bomber hit the Empire State building. Fourteen people were killed. Significant damage. One of the engines went through the building. And this was an ACCIDENT.

The timing and location of the actual event was a surprise, not the actual event. People also need to understand that it can happen again.

Re:Oh, look!

[Martin Blank]

It also had the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, which was composed of volunteers of Asian descent and became the most highly decorated regiment in the history of the United States. The story of racism towards the Japanese in World War II is a bit more complex than just the internments.

Re:NO!

[MichaelSmith]

Especially because the terrorist in question remained in his seat the whole time.

No he spent 20 minutes in the toilet possibly preparing for the explosion. Then he covered himself with a blanket and tried to set it off.

Re:10,000,000+ U.S. commerical flights annually...

[MichaelSmith]

Has anybody provided any evidence that the guy had anything remotely like a bomb?

From this article:
 

High explosives are believed to have been moulded to his body and sewn in to his underpants.
...

A preliminary FBI analysis has found that the device allegedly found on Mr Abdulmutallab contained the high explosive PETN, also known as pentaerythritol.

It sounds pretty full on to me. I think we dodged a bullet.

Re:This is kind of rediculous

[keithmo]

Ok, I'm game. What's been implemented post-9/11 that's made us more secure?

I agree with Bruce Schneier on this: "Only two things have made flying safer [since 9/11]: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers."

To make stupid people feel more secure by appearing to do something.

Sadly, most people confuse "activity" with "progress".

Re:Congrats TSA/Al Queda

[Concerned Onlooker]

I flew from Las Vegas to LA today so I have yet to see these tightened up rules. At LAS I couldn't detect anything different and it was as though nothing unusual had happened yesterday. The only unusual thing I experienced was a family so dense--in line ahead of me--that they couldn't get it together enough to get through the security scan in under 10 minutes while everyone waited behind them. And oddly enough the TSA folks were unflinchingly polite about it all. It took so long that I finally gathered up my bins and went to another line.

So, despite all the talk here it's not like it's instant crackdown in TSA land.

Re:My Theory

[Neoprofin]

Ryanair is actually exploring "standing" seats.

Re:One hour? Seriously?

[Dunbal]

However, security theater serves a purpose

      Yes. It keeps TSA people employed. But then again, breaking windows serves a purpose too. However that's not an EFFICIENT use of funds.

Re:How about not allowing direct flight from Niger

[TheRaven64]

You were flying into or out of the Schengen area. If you fly between Schengen destinations via Amsterdam, you don't have to pass through the checks. It's only when you land at or want to leave from a terminal designated for non-Schengen destinations that you have to pass the checks. Take a look at the airport map if you still have one one, and you will see the Schengen line right down the middle. You can get from some arrival areas to others without going through passport or security control, but others require you to cross the line.

Re:NO!

[h4rm0ny]

By "ignoring them" I assume you mean their message not their attempts to kill people.

That's not necessarily a good idea. What demand was Al Quaeda making when they attacked the World Trade Centre? They wanted the US to stop propping up the undemocratic Saudi regime which survives due to US support. If more people of the USA understood just how bad that regime is and how their government supports it in their name, they might stop it and then you'd get less extremists striking out at the US. Ignoring the motivations of terrorists does nobody any good. But instead the US media wants to portray these people as if they are some evil that just comes out of nowhere.

Re:The art of copmpromise

[couchslug]

"(anybody want to invent a pants-mouted bomb detonated by urine?) "

Bombs can be stuffed up the arse for transport, and thanks to the internet we know a grenade-sized object can fit with some work.
This fellow didn't get close enough, but someone will:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090902_aqap_paradigm_shifts_and_lessons_learned

"Unlike al-Awfi, al-Asiri was not a genuine repentant -- he was a human Trojan horse. After al-Asiri entered a small room to speak with Prince Mohammed, he activated a small improvised explosive device (IED) he had been carrying inside his anal cavity. The resulting explosion ripped al-Asiri to shreds but only lightly injured the shocked prince -- the target of al-Asiri's unsuccessful assassination attempt.

While the assassination proved unsuccessful, AQAP had been able to shift the operational paradigm in a manner that allowed them to achieve tactical surprise. The surprise was complete and the Saudis did not see the attack coming -- the operation could have succeeded had it been better executed. "

Re:NO!

[dgatwood]

The escape window opens inward like all cabin doors. Given the air pressure gradient, there's no way any person could open it. In fact, if I'm remembering the numbers correctly, there's no way that ten people pulling at once could exert that much force.

Re:NO!

[h4rm0ny]

Uh, oil props up the Saudi Arabia government. The USA does not purchase that much oil from there, so the focus of hate is incorrect.

Firstly, the Saudi's have a great deal of influence over world oil prices which affects the US economy greatly. Secondly, the Saudis are an ally of the US in the Middle East (at least the ruling regime is, the people are a different matter). For example, the Saudi's are fighting an on-off proxy war with Iran in Yemen (a small country on the Southern border of Saudi). They fly US supplied F-15s. The US navy has intervened at their request to carry out bombings. Up until 2003, (i.e. post 9/11) the US had around 4,500 troops stationed in the country. I hate to pull out Wikipedia as its often used as a lazy way to find facts that support ones case out of context, but in this case I'm going to post a link: US & Saudi Relations. Note that the US provided both training and modern weaponry to the Saudi military in order to "combat shiite extremism". Extremism of course means revolutionaries that you don't like. Bahrain isn't legally part of Saudi Arabia, but I think you'll forgive me if I roll them in together given their indivisible strategic and military circumstances and united political positions. The US Fifth Fleet is based there (normally). If you think those forces wouldn't (and haven't) got involved in putting down any revolutionary efforts, you're mistaken.

I think that demonstrates US support for the Saudi regime. The US wants a strong presence in the Middle East and the Saudi regime is happy to be their loyal ally and base of operations at the expense of the people. It's a fucking monarchy for fucks sake. As regards your statement that Al Quaeda being "a big baby using the excuse of "OMG they stepped on our sand, get em'", Bin Laden himself stated that their one of their main motivations was US presence in Saudi. Why should that be false? Al Quaeda wanted to overthrow the Saudi regime. The US protects the Saudi regime. What is your reason for disputing their given motivations? It's a piss-poor sort of terrorist that goes about striking terror for causes other than their own.

Re:10,000,000+ U.S. commerical flights annually...

[apoc.famine]

Nope. We didn't dodge a damn thing. A pile of explosives goes poof with a flash and some flame. That's it. Even a really big pile. A pile of explosives in a very solid tube with one end open is a gun, which can shoot stuff out of the open end. A pile of explosives in a sealed container is a bomb, and can build up enough pressure to blow holes in things.
 
Sure, he had a great explosive. But without a sealed, solid container to put them in, he's only going to burn his dick off.
 
And I'm pretty sure that if you took a threaded steel container through security, they'd take an extra look at the rest of what you're carrying.

Re:NO!

[Kizeh]

BBC claims this Joe Six-Pack was Dutch, actually.

100,000?

[Anonymous Coward]

That 100,000 dead people statistic in the two wars has been used for 5 years already! Has nobody died in 5 years?

Decent estimates are over 1 million -for a while now.

Safety vs. Security

[Roger W Moore]

i'm not allowed to take beer back from germany

Yes you are - you are just not allowed to have it in the cabin with you. There is nothing preventing you from checking it.

my girlfriend was denied a blanket because "we are taking off".

That is a reasonable safety issue, not a security one. They do not want bags, blankets etc. blocking seat rows in the event of a emergency at take off and landing where they are most likely to occur and where there is no time to clear things away if one does happen.

i'm not allowed to FUCKING LISTED TO MUSIC..... i don't like being waken up unless necessary.

Again this is a safety issue. They want to make sure that you can hear any emergency announcements at take off and landing when there is very little time to act. In Canada now you are allowed to wear headphones connected to the plane's internal audio (which will presumably play any announcements).

However your post does demonstrate a predictable reaction to all the stupid, assinine "security" rules which they keep throwing at us. Eventually people will get so irritated and annoyed by all the idiocy that they will stop listening and obeying all these rules because, if they know that 50% of them are stupid then perhaps the other 50% are as well. At that point you lose the willing cooperation of passengers and end up with a net reduction in safety.

Re:10,000,000+ U.S. commerical flights annually...

[Anonymous Coward]

That is only true for low explosives. (gunpowder etc)

High explosives expand into their gaseous phase fast enough that a container is not essential.

Re:Which 4,000 vs. which 1 million?

[I_M_Noman]

The people at the top of those buildings were some of the wealthiest people on the planet

WTF?!? The people I worked with on the 97th floor of 1 WTC were working stiffs like you & me, not "some of the wealthiest people on the planet". So were the people on 96, 95, 94, 93, 98, and 99. There were no "multi-millionaires" among them. (The multi-millionaires in the firm I worked for then stayed in the Midtown Manhattan office. WTC was for back office staff only.)

Don't talk about things you have no knowledge of.

Re:Enough of this shit already

[A beautiful mind]

About cancer research: I believe the total NIH budget is somewhere around $30B, which makes up rougly 25-30% of the total biomedical research done in the US, so let's say there is about $100-150B per year spent on biomedical research in the US. Specifically for cancer, the NCI has a budget of about $5B and assuming the 1:4 ratio of public:private investment holds true, the US spends $20-25B per year on cancer research.

This is a pitifully small change compared to waging wars, "war on terror", or just the defense budget of the USA. From the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, funding for cancer research could have been tripled for the next 30 years!