Slashdot Mirror
American Airlines Is Using a CT Scanner To Screen Luggage At New York's JFK Airport (theverge.com)
According to American Airlines, the airline is working with the TSA to install a new bag-scanning machine at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport. "The machine uses the same technology as CT scanners, providing a 3D image of bag's contents, and is expected to be operational in late July," reports The Verge. From the report: The new scanner, which will be used at the airport's Terminal 8 security checkpoint, will allow TSA to rotate a bag's image 360 degrees to show its contents. American Airlines says this should provide a more effective way for agents to inspect bags for explosives and other prohibited items. TSA administrator David Pekoske tells CBS News that the new machines could allow for liquids, gels, aerosols, and laptops to be left in bags. The TSA plans to have 15 of the new CT scanners at airports by the end of the year, and are authorized to purchase up to 240 of the machines, which cost $300,000 each, in 2019. The technology has also been tested at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and in Boston.
If they can effectively screen baggage and prove it, it might reduce some of the other security-theater TSA nonsense.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/world-first_geneva-airport-tests-revolutionary-3-d-baggage-scanners/44244006/
You're assuming the TSA guys actually work.
Apparently they were only 5 percent effective. Yes, 5%.
Theater Security Assholes.
---
TSA Logic
"the new machines could allow for liquids, gels, aerosols, and laptops to be left in bags."
Just as the guns, knives and hand-grenades they never find when they get tested.
are you confused between CT scanners and MRI?
CAT scans use x rays. MRI uses magnets.
I think what you really want to know is if anyone has tried to smuggle explosives on to a plane, not into an airport. You don't get checked when you walk into an airport, you get checked when you go to the gates.
And, the answer is "yes". People have tried to smuggle explosives onto airplanes. Here is a partial list of 2017 attempts:
There were also about 4,000 guns that TSA seized in 2017 when stupid jackoffs (mostly rappers, professional athletes and Republican officials) tried carrying them onto a plane.
People also like to bring inert explosive devices onto planes for some reason. A bunch of inert hand grenades, claymores, suicide vests and other goodies were seized in 2017. Also, throwing stars, daggers disguised as hairbrushes and tons of other whacky shit.
https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2018/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
MRIs use magnets. CT uses X rays.
I thought the BS about those was because the security types were afraid of explosives? How are CT scans going to mitigate that?
You are funny, acting like the shape is the only information you get from an X-ray....
You do understand that density of the material along with some very interesting information about the structure at a molecular level is obtained with X-Rays. Interesting enough to make a determination about it's chemical composition and tell explosives apart from shampoo, shaving cream and mouthwash. All this without looking at the shape...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Actually, I think they eventually will.
X-Rays can give you a lot more information about a material than you might think looking at a B&W picture of your broken arm.
In Fact, you can tell a LOT about the material using an X-Ray and lots of detectors looking at how they are scattered going though an object, including details about the molecular structure and clues about the chemistry of the material. It doesn't seem a stretch to me to assume that CT techniques could be used to tell the difference between the baby formula, bottle of water, shampoo, shaving cream and explosives.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
A CT scanner isn't a MRI. Rather, it's a fancy x-ray machine that computes the density of what is being scanned in 3D. Metal is not a problem for these machines.
In theory, they could potentially distinguish between real toothpaste and a tube of high explosive based on the difference in density. Although, I don't know how different such things will appear in reality and it could easily be fooled by mixing in modifiers to give the same x-ray absorption as the item they are intending to mimic.
Knowledge Brings Fear
thats the budget for the TSA to be given the ability to dissect your luggage and look for known weapons and bombs that have been previously used in airline hijackings. The average middle school in america is 10-20 million dollars. The average library is about 4 million dollars. The war in Afghanistan, which has now run for 17 years, has cost 1.7 trillion dollars.
the point isnt to split hairs about what the money could be used for, its to give pause to consider that every dollar we spend defending against an enemy we largely spend 40 years creating, we could spend money on preventative measures like education and reducing our dependency on unnecessary and endless wars of aggression.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Interesting enough to make a determination about it's chemical composition and tell explosives apart from shampoo, shaving cream and mouthwash.
The liquid limitations are not because someone tried to smuggle a liquid explosive on board, it was because they tried to smuggle the components to make a liquid explosive on board. Acetone and hydrogen peroxide, to be specific.
Actually, metal IS a problem for a traditional medical CT machine which works with a point source and only a couple of point targets going round and round as the thing being imaged slowly moves though the scanner. Metal creates scattered X-Rays and shadows that the CT software doesn't know how to deal with in the medical world. I've seen these effects in CT's of my daughter's arm where they had to install metal plates after a car accident.
HOWEVER.... This is *also* a thing you can leverage if you want to and have multiple detectors to capture the scattered X-Rays. Then you can use the scattered information to better classify the materials and deal with metal, plastics and other X-Ray scattering and blocking materials. There is lots of information to be had doing that.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
What about the TSA is revolutionary? They are a government agency and they provide neither transportation nor any real security...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
They should offer you free CT scans when you pass the security checkpoint. Connect it with AI to catch random things and offer medical results after you land at your destination.
Yep, I understand, which is why we have the crazy limits on amounts of fluids and containers you can bring.
However, the components to make an explosive may be detectable using x-ray spectroscopy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You can basically detect the chemical makeup of the fluids using X-Rays and CT techniques if you have the proper source and detector setups. At $300K for each machine, I'm guessing they have the capability to do this in the hardware, just not implemented and/or validated yet in the software.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
However, the components to make an explosive may be detectable using x-ray spectroscopy
A CAT scan is not x-ray spectroscopy. It is a 3-D x-ray, based on density and not chemistry.
I'm guessing they have the capability to do this in the hardware
Unlikely.
Actually there was a misread of the text, it's Virginians
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
(Note: The video has Robin Williams saying some four letter words.)
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
AC Re "How are CT scans going to mitigate that?"
Think of a 3d look inside anything that a passenger attempts to bring with them.
Drugs, toothpaste, different chemicals all show up as something different.
Add some color and a GUI with an alert for 100% of all luggage and such scans will find a lot of what is attempted to be hidden.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Think of every other substance that is also detectable. The different ways to alter chemistry to try and get past older systems.
The capability is to build a 3d image of all luggage and have chemicals and substances show.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Different tech gets used around the world.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
It is not that big a hardware addition to add X ray spec capability. Probably it is a matter of market demand. Xray spec has little medical market value. (Unknown objects? Forensics?)
They are already using CT scans at PHX airport. It is much more convenient, I didn't even have to take my laptops out of my bag.
I'll believe that the TSA agents are taking airplane security seriously when they start putting the TSA agents on the planes. I know that the crew have their best interests in mind on that plane because they have to ride in the plane. Maybe that's how it can work, the TSA agents become the crew. They take a shift working security, then they take a shift as attendants on the plane. Of course they can't check themselves through security so someone else has to check them.
Here's a better idea. Have the airlines provide their own security. I don't believe that Congress has any real concern over the security of an airplane except to the point that one might land on their collective laps like was the plan on 9/11. The airlines on the other hand have a very real interest in not losing an airplane. The crew of the airplanes have a very real interest in not getting lost with the plane. Make the airlines responsible for the security because if they screw up then I can find a different airline. If the TSA screws up then what's my option? Find a new government? Right, let's do that.
I propose we put in the document that creates the government something like this:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
If the government wants to search my bags before getting on an airplane then they should need a warrant.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Now it would be great if American Airlines could also install some better customer service for their customers too...
They don't move slowly any more. Currently, you can get 320-slice scanners. That's at 0.5 mm per slice, so 16 cm per rotation of the imaging ring. At $300k, these probably aren't 320s, but then again, they don't need medical certification, so they can be quite a bit cheaper.
Also, regarding metal shadows and scatters - if you think that plate in your daughter's arm is impressive, you ought to see one in someone who has had a lot of metal fillings in their teeth.
It seems the government’s tiger repelling rock has been enough to discourage further attempts, or we can go with the tigers don’t want to eat us now theory.
FTFY
Obligatory link to The Simpson’s clip: https://youtu.be/xSVqLHghLpw
Long story short, you’ve created a false dichotomy. Given the 95% failure rate, we can assume the TSA’s security efforts aren’t doing much. Likewise, the terrorists likely still want us gone. The only reasonable conclusion is this that they aren’t attacking us for other reasons.
Maybe the reason you didn't hear about them is because their weapons were taken away before they boarded the plane.
You are welcome on my lawn.
However, the components to make an explosive may be detectable using x-ray spectroscopy
A CAT scan is not x-ray spectroscopy. It is a 3-D x-ray, based on density and not chemistry.
I'm guessing they have the capability to do this in the hardware
Unlikely.
Ah, but the equipment configuration of a CT machine *could* be used in the same way as am x-ray spectroscopy setup, especially if you are removing the majority of the moving parts of a CT machine by putting a ring of detectors around the object to be observed and then you could detect the diffractions and reflections from a point source of X-Rays. My guess (and that's all) is they've done this, or think they can do it with the equipment they have with more software and processing. Remember, what makes a CT generate images is the post processing of the collected data to calculate the X-Ray blocking of the material and a specific point, by passing a beam of X-Rays though the object as the detector and source go around it.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
So I have a question..
What stops them from doing away with the rotating bits?
I was thinking that you could have a ring of detectors that had sufficient resolution and then have a ring of scanning X-Ray sources that didn't move, but could scan an X-Ray beam though the object and to the detectors. No moving parts = easier to maintain and as a bonus you get to get your slices faster AND can do some additional calculations and get some interesting chemical information too.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Ah, but the equipment configuration of a CT machine *could* be used in the same way as am x-ray spectroscopy setup,
if only a CAT scanner had spectroscopy hardware and not just a density (intensity) detector. And if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
especially if you are removing the majority of the moving parts of a CT machine by putting a ring of detectors around the object to be observed and then you could detect the diffractions and reflections from a point source of X-Rays.
So, yeah, if they replace all the hardware for a CT scanner and replace it with X-ray spectroscopy hardware, they'd have an X-ray spectroscopy system.
Remember, what makes a CT generate images is the post processing of the collected data to calculate the X-Ray blocking of the material and a specific point, by passing a beam of X-Rays though the object as the detector and source go around it.
It seems I know what a CT scanner does a lot better than you do, since you're imagining all kinds of different hardware that isn't in one. Don't tell me to "remember" when you haven't.
Drugs, toothpaste, different chemicals all show up as something different.
Things with different densities show up as different. It's not chemistry, it's density.
Add some color
CT scanners don't create color images. They create INTENSITY maps, and you can apply pseudo-color colormaps to the intensity images to highlight small variations in density.
and a GUI
Oh, my, you should have said that first. Of course with a GUI they can detect reversals in the polarity of the neutron flow and all kinds of other things, too.
and such scans will find a lot of what is attempted to be hidden.
THAT is the important part of using a CT scanner instead of a simple X-ray. If you are carrying a 10" knife and make sure it is standing on its tip as it passed through an X-ray, they don't see a knife, they see a very small cross-section of something. With a CT scanner, you can't hide the knife that way.
I am reminded of the old saying about technology sufficiently advanced appears as magic. CT scanners appear to be sufficiently advanced for some folk here, and they're being given all kinds of magical abilities.
I don't know for sure (I'm an anesthesiologist, not a radiologist), but I'd assume it's because the emitters are too big. Even a small emitter is between a coffee can and a two-liter soda bottle in size.
Outside of the clinical space, some X-Ray and CT systems use dual energy emmission to have better materials discrimination than you might think, as it isn't just based on density but also Z eff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_nuclear_charge).
Also, there are units that don't spin the tube - an older system that spun a beam to hit a large, circular annode (only a single manafacturer), and at least one modern design that has hundreds of small emitters (https://www.rapiscansystems.com/en/rtt).
Cheers.
The fact that a fish swims in water does not make it an expert in fluid dynamics. GogglesPisano (199483)
CT is basically an X-ray with computers that do just that. So functionally there is little difference between an X-Ray and a CT scan, except that you use computers to analyze the X-Ray image and there is better resolution than a typical X-Ray machine because it uses hundreds of times more radiation.
The question is whether the radiation levels will cause any issues with electronics. Space missions have to have radiation-hardened chips for what amounts to equal or lesser radiation than a high-powered CT can put out.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Is this really a cost effective way to save lives? How many deaths a year are caused in the US by terrorists on aircraft? How many of those would actually be stopped by CAT scanners?
That is separate from the serious privacy issues that other posters have raised.
100% of all luggage and the GUI shows the "human" that something is the wrong kind of chemical. A nice color gui and 3d rotation can help with that.
Re "chemistry" - the plastics and gels change as different attempts are made to hide drugs in different ways.
The better the scanner science the more every attempt is detected and fails.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
There also haven't been any unicorns seized by TSA. But they did seize explosives, edged weapons, and 4,000 fucking guns.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If it works the same way as a regular screener x-ray, it should still highlight things that could be explosives.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
We jury rigged up a 3d x-ray scanner 17ish years ago as proof of concept, bounced a few ideas off a screener company's people. Was.. think some German Uni had also come up with a way to implement it (but appeared different to ours, they were going for really small items, we were trying to figure out out to do 3d screener x-ray systems for luggage). I'm sure the screener companies have figured this out years ago, it was making it able to be sold at a profit was the tricky bit we've been waiting all these years for.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
>CT scanners don't create color images. They create INTENSITY maps, and you can apply pseudo-color colormaps to the intensity images to highlight small variations in density. They could be using dual energy x-rays to create that slice to make that final image, in which case they can do the usual colour lookup to determine material composition, not just density. They're calling it a CT-scan as that's what people expect, but not sure if this would be capable of dual energy.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
Go through the security at Schiphol Airport and you're asked to leave everything in your bag in the right 6 lanes. Has been like that since the start of the year and they aren't 3D CT scanning anything, they just have a better X-ray machine with finer contrast adjustment.
Except that one in Boston and like hundreds of mass shootings.
But ok.
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
You can basically detect the chemical makeup of the fluids using X-Rays and CT techniques if you have the proper source and detector setups. At $300K for each machine, I'm guessing they have the capability to do this in the hardware, just not implemented and/or validated yet in the software.
They are using L3's ClearScan scanner, described as combining "dual-energy CT technology and advanced explosives detection algorithms". It's not really x-ray spectroscopy, but it can be used to measure effective atomic number as well as density.
To quote a paper on the subject:
An object’s material type can be better determined by using both its density and
effective atomic number than by using the density alone. For example, water and the explosive ANFO
(Ammonium Nitrate and fuel oil) can have similar physical densities. However, they differ significantly
in effective atomic numbers.
Sold well all over South America :) The interesting thin layers of chemicals around the edge of the luggage shows up as a nice color every time.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
But luggage scanners DO create color images (albeit false colors), and many modern scanners combine different types of scans to discriminate different types of materials.
They don't move slowly any more.
No kidding. most of the modern scanners can do a full rotation in under half a second.
Currently, you can get 320-slice scanners.
Actually I saw one of the newer Toshiba scanners a few months ago. They have a couple models that are 640 slice. With the speed that the table can move through one of those, I can see how a conveyor belt could move luggage through something like that a very fast rate.
Unfortunately, metal artifacts are still an issue. But the software has improved greatly to clean this up. But I doubt the TSA has a 3D lab full of techs post processing this stuff either.
I never claimed to be an expert here, in fact quite the opposite. But you seem to be all upset, as if I've hit a nerve.
I'm looking at the theory here and there are some common aspects between the physics of CT and spectroscopy that just *might* be possible to leverage using the right detectors. Actually, it looks pretty likely to me as the physical layouts of the two techniques are *very* similar, so similar that I'd be willing to bet that you could generate a CT image using spectroscopy hardware pretty easily in the non-medical world. Bu t hey, I'm just some guy with a EE degree who programs for a living, so my physics and engineering training doesn't make me an expert in CT or Spectroscopy using X-Rays.
As for your perspective, I really don't know if you are just upset because I'm just naïve about this or because you didn't think about it first. However, I do know you are not very forthcoming with information to support your claims and you are rude about it as well. Rudeness isn't a good way to deal with naiveté education is and you don't seem to be willing/able to educate anybody. So chances are you know a little, but not enough to be the expert you claim. I could be wrong, but either way, there is nothing for me to learn from you discussing this further, unless you alter your approach.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Also, it has stopped all the tiger attacks. Hasn't been a single one since the TSA started.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
It's better than welfare, but could they give them something to do that doesn't involve me having to be late for my plane?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Source?
You don't have to "look it up". I've made it easy for you by including a link in my comment above where you can actually see many of the edged weapons and guns.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Give me an honest answer: Is someone who, in 2017, doesn't know you can't take a gun on a plane really smart enough to own a gun? How do they remember which part they're supposed to point away from themselves?
And shouldn't someone who's so stupid that they bring a gun onto an airplane in 2017 get a serious smack upside the head?
You are welcome on my lawn.