|
photomikey posted:Sometimes when I fly when I have a cold or other sinus condition, I think the pressurization and de-pressurization along with the accompanying altitude change helps turn my cold into a sinus infection or makes the congestion worse. Part of it was exercise, the other part was drinking a lot of fruit juice and taking vitamin C supplements. Our sleep was hosed severely to the point I have a pretty bad sleep disorder now, but I could imagine that sleep would help a lot. I never had a problem with sinuses or allergies, but I do believe the air quality on a plane affects you immensely. I could notice a significant difference between a 787 Dreamliner and just about every other aircraft in terms of how I felt on the plane and how I felt after. The hype was real to me, and a friends watch that did log pressure showed it pressurized to about one mile up, which isn't that bad. I only had one time where I got sick/felt sick, and that was coming back from the UK. I actually flew with barotrauma in my ears and a severe ear infection just so I could get home. This was a few months ago, so I was disgusted with the agency and didn't feel like dealing with their poo poo calling in sick overseas. Luckily, it didn't hurt me too much, but I was also pretty much out the whole flight, which my teammates compensated for. I washed my hands a lot. After seeing how disgusting people could be in airplane bathrooms and imagining the particles floating around, I tended to wash my hands at the drop of a hat. Sadly, no. I wish that were the case, but that would cause some serious scheduling and logistical problems. That and it would be fun and raise morale, and the agency won't have any of that, even if it didn't cost them money somehow. They don't give nearly enough turnaround time, which is why there are so many sicknesses and illnesses as a person gets closer to retirement. I left fairly young, so all I have is some mild hearing issues, a sleep disorder, and mild back pain. Edit: VVVV Yep! The things that I noticed a difference were the pressure, the humidity, and the lighting is wonderful, too. It was also so drat quiet! Jiro Kage fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Oct 19, 2015 |
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:I never had a problem with sinuses or allergies, but I do believe the air quality on a plane affects you immensely. I could notice a significant difference between a 787 Dreamliner and just about every other aircraft in terms of how I felt on the plane and how I felt after. One of the biggest features of the 787 (although Airbus is supposedly doing the same thing with the A350, I haven't seen it documented as well yet,) is Boeing allowing the packs to retain more ambient moisture in the conditioned air. In every other pressurized aircraft that I know of, the pack removes as much water from the cooled air as possible (generally with cyclonic separators) before the system re-injects more hot (and also bone-dry) bleed air for temperature control. Cabin ambient humidity is generally REALLY low, just a few percent, mostly from the meatbags inside, rather than from the exterior atmosphere, while in a 787, its closer to twenty percent. This probably does wonders for cabin comfort. (I've never been on a 787 for comparison. Been on lots of conventionally-pressurized aircraft.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
1.) what agency do you work for now? 2.) any chance of FAMS actually doing investigative work, given how much money (well over 100k not including all the per diem) they make? 3.) the best place to conceal a gun is the prison pocket (i.e. rectum) c/d tia
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
I work for another federal agency in a non-law enforcement position. Not with the current administration being absolutely terrified of FAMS doing any work. There had been rumors of 1811 qualifications for years, but they never surfaced and I am doubtful it will happen. It is a fantastic waste of resources that could be utilized for the good of all that the agency does not want to use. If I had a backup, I would totally keester it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
I sat next to the FAM on an international fight a few years ago, he got up and was talking to the flight attendants in the galley for 6 hours out of the 8 hour flight which kind wigged me out a little (how does someone just vanish over the Atlantic?) till I got up to use the bathroom and saw where he went. It was my 21st birthday and he stole me a whole bag of beers of the beverage cart and gave them to me when he finally did return to his seat for landing  I don't think any of that was conducive to being a good FAM though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:Not with the current administration being absolutely terrified of FAMS doing any work. There had been rumors of 1811 qualifications for years, but they never surfaced and I am doubtful it will happen. It is a fantastic waste of resources that could be utilized for the good of all that the agency does not want to use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
So how long did you spend away from your family while you're on duty? Is it like OTR truck driver long or just two days and so? And what did you tell people when they ask you what you do for a living? do you lie or just tell em some BS story about being a cop or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:In the end, it's the core of an onion, and a deterrent factor. I know that a lot of people aren't too keen on deterrence, but the fact remains that it is a very, very good one. They have found copies of FAM manuals in caves in Afghanistan, and we know that they are trying to find ways to bypass the FAM service or find ways to know when and where FAMS are on flights. Have there been any incidents where FAMs have stopped a genuine terrorist in the air?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
quote:So how long did you spend away from your family while you're on duty? Is it like OTR truck driver long or just two days and so? Way too much. That's another reason I left - the pay is good and it's 6C covered (which is a 1.7% per year retirement pension) but the time away was too much and they were even increasing the time. It was also starting to affect the health of people, to the point I have a sleep disorder and my hearing is kinda hosed. Trips could be up to 6 days long from my field office on the west coast. I used to tell people I worked in Network security since I could speak the lingo and used to deal with that. For general populace or my wife's acquaintances, I worked for the Department of Homeland security doing computer security work. No one ever stopped to ask why someone from DHS was working in other countries. quote:Have there been any incidents where FAMs have stopped a genuine terrorist in the air? Nope, and I hope there never has to be. It's an insurance policy that costs about 950 million dollars a year. This was something that was impressed upon us during training, and is also something that most of the people that don't like the agency tend to point out. What ISN'T pointed out is that the FAMS don't do anything else not for lack of trying by the workers, but it is again because the agency is run by the worst managed program in the government, the TSA. There is plenty more that the FAMS could do - transporting prisoners, patrolling transportation venues, investigating transportation crimes, but the agency has no desire to do anything. No matter what may be thought about the agency now, I firmly believe it is necessary. The door opened for these types of attacks come 9/11, and without the proper methods in place it most definitely could happen again. It sucks that it needs to be that way, but there really does need to be someone mysterious that may or may not be on the flight that could seriously gently caress you up if you try to crash that plane. quote:Why this this the case, do you think? Just general incompetence on some level or is there some given reason or what? I'm not ignoring this, I just need to think about it carefully and how to phrase things so it doesn't seem like bitching, and doesn't broach any subjects I can't talk about. I'll get to it in another post soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
If you could reorganize the TSA/ Homeland security in any way. How would you do it? Second question. Of all the other countries that do airport and airline security, what methods would you steal from other countries that you might not be allowed to use in the U.S.? Pilot and flight instructor here. I think the TSA is a complete waste of resources. They hire idiots who can barely fog a mirror. And it's not just the security screeners that are dumb, it's their mid management too. I have heard that other alphabet agencies regarding the TSA as the dumbest agency possible. Do you think that makes them even worse, or will that somehow bring about a revolution and make it better?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:I'm not ignoring this, I just need to think about it carefully and how to phrase things so it doesn't seem like bitching, and doesn't broach any subjects I can't talk about. I'll get to it in another post soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Why in the heck do folks who buy large keys need to be screened by the TSA when it's time to take delivery? I don't believe that our test pilots are screened prior to test flights (correct me if I'm wrong here), and I know that mechanics and inspectors who have access to the bowels of the plane certainly aren't. Is it just an issue that now all the folks piloting/riding along are behind security now or is it actually kind of stupid? The barrier of entry to buy something like a 747 is pretty drat high, even when you ignore that actual cost.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:Nope, and I hope there never has to be. It's an insurance policy that costs about 950 million dollars a year. This was something that was impressed upon us during training, and is also something that most of the people that don't like the agency tend to point out. What ISN'T pointed out is that the FAMS don't do anything else not for lack of trying by the workers, but it is again because the agency is run by the worst managed program in the government, the TSA. There is plenty more that the FAMS could do - transporting prisoners, patrolling transportation venues, investigating transportation crimes, but the agency has no desire to do anything. I did a little number-crunching with the aid of my friend Mr Google, who told me that there are maybe possibly about 3,500 air marshals and 30,000 (ish) commercial passenger flights per day in the USA. Assuming that the number is accurate and every air marshal is a job zombie who works 365 days a year, that's about a 1 in 8 chance of a flight having an air marshal on it. Halve the number of marshals, it becomes 1 in 17. If I had an insurance policy that only gave me a 1 in 17 chance of paying out on the exact thing that they were insuring me against, I'd think it was daylight robbery.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:I did a little number-crunching with the aid of my friend Mr Google, who told me that there are maybe possibly about 3,500 air marshals and 30,000 (ish) commercial passenger flights per day in the USA. Assuming that the number is accurate and every air marshal is a job zombie who works 365 days a year, that's about a 1 in 8 chance of a flight having an air marshal on it. Halve the number of marshals, it becomes 1 in 17. If I had an insurance policy that only gave me a 1 in 17 chance of paying out on the exact thing that they were insuring me against, I'd think it was daylight robbery.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:If you could reorganize the TSA/ Homeland security in any way. How would you do it? Well, I can really only speak to the FAM service, and in that case, I would get rid of administrators that haven't done the job. That is, all the secret service guys in high positions, and all the supervisors that haven't flown a normal schedule since 2008. At the very least, they would need to get back to the rotation. In addition, if you read the 9/11 report, it says that one problem it foresaw was a lack of information sharing, and that is a HUGE problem, as FAMS really don't have the information they need to safely complete their missions, at least as I feel. I'm not sure about methods from other countries since I haven't really been through the whole security process in other countries. As for the TSA, I don't have a drat clue. It's so messed up and so focused on image instead of its job that I'm not sure you can fix it. No matter how much it sucks, screening is something that is there and needs to stay - but how to fix it? I don't really know. I'd say somehow you need to focus on the people doing that screening and actually make them WANT to do it, instead of it being "just a job". You're right about their middle management, too. While the FAM service was pretty bad, it was good that we were considered a subordinate agency and more or less left to our own policies. It's interesting because the TSA is garbage, but I know other agencies like the FAMS. I guess it's because of the training. I don't think the way anyone feels will change the TSA, unfortunately. That's because screening is a necessity. It's almost like they ignore the black eyes they get from not motivating or challenging employees. I don't know, but I don't foresee any improvements without a radical shift and a need to provide the agency with even MORE money to challenge and incentivize employees somehow. Maybe I've got it wrong, but the TSA to me was a necessity that was ran worse than the FAMS. quote:Why in the heck do folks who buy large keys need to be screened by the TSA when it's time to take delivery? I don't believe that our test pilots are screened prior to test flights (correct me if I'm wrong here), and I know that mechanics and inspectors who have access to the bowels of the plane certainly aren't. I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean - large keys, as in house keys or something? As for the people that work on the airports, they can and are screened randomly, depending on the airport. Most of the time you have access to the sterile area through a special badge that each airport manages called a SIDA. However, the TSA can and does randomly do screening at employee checkpoints and access areas. I don't quite understand what you mean in this second paragraph either. quote:I did a little number-crunching with the aid of my friend Mr Google, who told me that there are maybe possibly about 3,500 air marshals and 30,000 (ish) commercial passenger flights per day in the USA. Assuming that the number is accurate and every air marshal is a job zombie who works 365 days a year, that's about a 1 in 8 chance of a flight having an air marshal on it. Halve the number of marshals, it becomes 1 in 17. If I had an insurance policy that only gave me a 1 in 17 chance of paying out on the exact thing that they were insuring me against, I'd think it was daylight robbery. IF your numbers were correct, and IF it was completely random on which flight was assigned, you would be right and I would be in the camp with you. While I can't talk to numbers or coverage, I can say that flights are not randomly assigned. quote:Three months ago it came to light that TSA missed 95% of weapons hidden in luggage. You know what they've done to overhaul the agency since then? Absolutely nothing. That was horrible. You can only imagine how that made us feel thinking we may actually have a gunfight on a plane. I think it was actually 97% or something. There really needs to be congressional pressure on them to fix this. I really want to see it for the FAMS so that they get more rest time and new supervisors, but it's too small of an agency relatively speaking for that to happen, and not enough ratings for the media, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 15:19
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:If I had an insurance policy that only gave me a 1 in 17 chance of paying out on the exact thing that they were insuring me against, I'd think it was daylight robbery. I'm sure a major part of what he meant by insurance is the deterrent factor, which has got to be huge. Good thread, thanks OP. Any cool travel gear/gadgets you'd recommend?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
antiga posted:I'm sure a major part of what he meant by insurance is the deterrent factor, which has got to be huge. Yeah, I think it is a huge deterrent. Well, I always had two specific things for international travel. One was like a really small "go bag" - a small bottle of aspirin, vaseline, some bandages and bandaids, different foreign currencies, an address book with embassy numbers and locations, a map for the area I was going, door wedges, shoelaces still tied up, a door screamer, and a master lock. It was a really small bag I never unpacked. It also had handless tampons - the small ones are perfect for bullet wounds sealants. I also always took some nasal moisturizer, which was just a basic saline - that helped me a lot after long flights. Melatonin was on every trip too, it helped me acclimatize a lot and just get some sleep. If you travel international a lot, global entry could be really helpful - even using the diplomat line at my home airport most of them got through faster than us. I didn't really have anything else special. I usually brought an iPad with lots of books, a computer to play games on, exercise clothes, and a change of clothes for the way back. If it was a longer trip more, obviously, and if I planned to go somewhere due to scheduled arrival and leave, another set of clothes. Airline food is also terrible for you, so a lot of times I would bring my own, but I don't think most of it can go through security so that may not work. If you fly United, make sure you have a mileage plus number, because being able to use it if you buy wireless and switch devices is nice. Also, there's a lot larger selection of movies that are accessible on your device with them than the seatback monitors. Really, flying sucks and I'm glad I don't have to do it as much anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean - large keys, as in house keys or something? As for the people that work on the airports, they can and are screened randomly, depending on the airport. Most of the time you have access to the sterile area through a special badge that each airport manages called a SIDA. However, the TSA can and does randomly do screening at employee checkpoints and access areas. Whoa, serves me right for phone posting, sorry about that. Replace large keys with "large planes". As in, when someone goes to Boeing and buys a 747, TSA requires screening before the new owners/their representatives can board their new plane and put it into service. Given the amount of background checks that go on to be type certified to fly those things or to even buy one (you can't just hand them a giant sack of cash or a check), it seems a bit extreme to me. Is it just theater or is there actually a good reason for it? I'm also curious if test pilots have to go through that crap as well either for FAA certification flights or for the training/test flights that serve as a "test drive" for our customers. I presume the former is a no because those planes are considered experimental aircraft at that point in time, and are severely limited in the crew that are allowed on board, but who knows!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:There really needs to be congressional pressure on them to fix this. It just goes to further convince me that TSA is not around to keep anybody safer, but to keep the voters in the flyover states feeling like the government is protecting them. While I agree with you that we have to have some screening... can we loving give it up with the bottles of water and the toothpaste? I don't mind being screened, even the (occasionally) intense screening, but when there's a bottle of water in my bag, the guy sees it, tells the bag searcher there's a bottle of water in there, we go through the charade of a bag search, they find and disarm me of my water... what goal does that achieve? I am okay with the security aspect of the screenings. But I get fed up with the theatre of it all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
This is a really interesting thread and I apologize for the derail, but I loving hate the TSA.photomikey posted:As a follow up on my comment that they missed 95% (97%?) of weapons and nothing changed... while i did mean nothing changed on a local level, i.e. they do bag checks and screening no different than before - It is further outrageous that everyone in the chain of command from the smurf running the screener up through Congress right to the President didn't express any concern much less outrage, nor demand any change. In tests performed in 2014 and 2015, the TSA failed to detect dangerous items in 67 out of 70 cases, or a 95.7% failure rate. Think about that next time you're standing in a security line for two hours. What is anyone accomplishing by making you stand there for two hours? photomikey posted:It just goes to further convince me that TSA is not around to keep anybody safer, but to keep the voters in the flyover states feeling like the government is protecting them. That's part of it, but another huge part is graft for defense companies. The infamous naked scanners that they scrapped cost $40 million, and the naked scanners they use now cost another $120 million. They also don't work (see above). That's $160 million into the pockets of some "security firm" for a product that doesn't work. The TSA program as a whole runs about $7 billion per year to achieve a 96% failure rate. Gee, I wonder why Republicans aren't looking into this giant, burning pile of tax dollars. photomikey posted:While I agree with you that we have to have some screening... can we loving give it up with the bottles of water and the toothpaste? I don't mind being screened, even the (occasionally) intense screening, but when there's a bottle of water in my bag, the guy sees it, tells the bag searcher there's a bottle of water in there, we go through the charade of a bag search, they find and disarm me of my water... what goal does that achieve? I am okay with the security aspect of the screenings. But I get fed up with the theatre of it all. It's essentially a form of welfare. The people who work for the TSA are largely unemployable elsewhere, so the government gives them a paycheck to annoy you and keep them out of the unemployment line. The clowns sexually harassing you at checkpoints aren't there to make anyone secure, as demonstrated by the TSA itself, they're there to give graft to defense contractors, help lower unemployment, and keep people scared of "terrorists" to help justify further military excursions, which folds back into the defense contractor graft. The clown stealing your water bottle isn't concerned with security. If he had any brain cells to rub together, he would know a bottle of water isn't harmful to anyone. But he doesn't have any brain cells because he works for the TSA, so you have to throw away your water bottle. I opt out of the naked scanners because I want to gum up their works. If everybody opted out, they would be forced to change their policies. I'm doing my small part and I encourage you to do yours next time you fly. Don't be mean, but don't be polite either. Until they pull their heads out of their asses, TSA screeners deserve nothing but derision and ridicule. gently caress those clowns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
I would be completely ok with abolishing the TSA, and giving the Air Marshal program the entirety of their budget. I worked at MIA for a couple years, mostly on the cargo side of the airport, and got to see limited parts of the backside of TSA. What a complete loving joke.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I would be completely ok with abolishing the TSA, and giving the Air Marshal program the entirety of their budget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
ColdPie posted:Until they pull their heads out of their asses, TSA screeners deserve nothing but derision and ridicule. gently caress those clowns. This reminds me of a story from the fountain pen thread. A well known store owner was traveling to a convention and was carrying on a bunch of his more expensive pens. He was forced by the TSA to bend over the tips of the nibs on every pen because "they could be used as weapons". If you've never used one before, the nib is one of the more expensive parts and if it were actually sharp you wouldn't be able to use them to write - they'd just rip the paper up. I'm normally a huge fan of looking at processes and realizing that a great deal of poor performance is due to lack of training, materials or morale, but it's stories like that which really piss me off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
photomikey posted:As a follow up on my comment that they missed 95% (97%?) of weapons and nothing changed... while i did mean nothing changed on a local level, i.e. they do bag checks and screening no different than before - It is further outrageous that everyone in the chain of command from the smurf running the screener up through Congress right to the President didn't express any concern much less outrage, nor demand any change. Unfortunately, I was only under the TSA on a dotted line, you have to understand. I cannot really give any information about how they run their policies at the screening level since The TSA was so far up our chain. The Federal Air Marshal Service has it's own administration and it's own director, who while subordinate to the TSA director (and like 15 other people in the TSA, which is ridiculous) really doesn't have much to do with it. I have no idea with the water thing. If you want me to venture a guess, I guess it's because explosives can be made to look like clear liquids? Honestly, this isn't my bag, and I don't know much about that and why they do the screenings the way they do. So, to sum it up, the FAMS are isolated from most of the TSA dealing and are basically only administratively controlled by them, which is where most of the complaints lie, ironically. quote:This is a really interesting thread and I apologize for the derail, but I loving hate the TSA. Don't worry, the FAMS aren't either. They existed before the TSA, but it was decided that was where they logically should be controlled from after 9/11. They went over to control of ICE for a while, but then back to the TSA. The FAMS are only administratively linked and controlled by the TSA, and have no bearing on how the TSA does it's operations. We don't even know WHY the TSA does what it does. I cannot answer questions on the TSA because I don't know. quote:In tests performed in 2014 and 2015, the TSA failed to detect dangerous items in 67 out of 70 cases, or a 95.7% failure rate. Think about that next time you're standing in a security line for two hours. What is anyone accomplishing by making you stand there for two hours? You are preaching to the choir, man. It's one of the reasons the Federal Law Enforcement Officer Association (FLEOA) is fighting to get the FAMS separated from the TSA, but their power and grip is too strong. It made me horribly concerned that the processes and equipment was bad because I flew on these planes a LOT more than most people, and despite being armed, you are still without backup outside of your team at 30000 feet. quote:I would be completely ok with abolishing the TSA, and giving the Air Marshal program the entirety of their budget. If they gutted the senior administration of the FAMS first I would see this. But due to legal regulations, I think, you would have to split off an enforcement/regulation arm, as the FAMS are considered a law enforcement arm. Barring organizational growing pains, it could work better. I don't know how the hell you could take the FAMS culture and make it effective on such a large forum nationwide while maintaining quality, though. Thanks for the vote of confidence, though! quote:This reminds me of a story from the fountain pen thread. A well known store owner was traveling to a convention and was carrying on a bunch of his more expensive pens. He was forced by the TSA to bend over the tips of the nibs on every pen because "they could be used as weapons". You want to hear something that's just as ridiculous and as funny? Never mind the fact that women can bring those huge knitting needles that would be GREAT for stabbing people with (even if they aren't razor sharp). Due to TSA regulations, FAMS cannot bring knives on planes. Yeah, we can bring our firearm, and a rescue tool, but we can't bring bladed items on planes - or at least aren't supposed to, we don't get screened. If someone found out, we could be in trouble, however. How is that for policy stupidity?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:You want to hear something that's just as ridiculous and as funny? Never mind the fact that women can bring those huge knitting needles that would be GREAT for stabbing people with (even if they aren't razor sharp). Due to TSA regulations, FAMS cannot bring knives on planes. Yeah, we can bring our firearm, and a rescue tool, but we can't bring bladed items on planes - or at least aren't supposed to, we don't get screened. If someone found out, we could be in trouble, however. How is that for policy stupidity? Maybe because while an air marshal wouldn't draw his gun for anything other than an instance where he might need to shoot anyone, with a knife they might forget and use it as a tool, and alarming other passengers because, hey someone has a knife on a plane. Then even if the flight crew says,hey don't worry about it, he's an air marshal, then the marshal's cover is still blown. I'm probably thinking this through too much though. Unrelated: are there any female air marshals, or is it pretty much only guys?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
I was traveling with a carry-on only, and had thrown my 4-D-cell mag-lite in my bag. TSA confiscated it, because "it could be used as a weapon." The screener really didn't appreciate my "It can also be used as a flashlight" comment. The local police officer standing nearby, though, thought it was loving hilarious. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The screener really didn't appreciate my "It can also be used as a flashlight" comment. Jiro Kage, this is another really broad question, I know: At this point, given the incompetency you've described or alluded to at all levels of the FAM/TSA/keep airplanes safe department, do you think there's any plausible hope of fixing how things work and making them more effective without just starting from scratch, or is that kind of a lost cause, this is the best we're gonna get situation? I realize that depends on a lot of things, I'm just curious about your personal opinion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
You keep mentioning "your team", is that additional FAMs on the plane itself? If so is it just you and a partner, or more like a handful of guys? Do you know who they are when you get on the plane or is it something that you'll only find out if poo poo hits the fan?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
How does the TSA and the US screening system compare to other nations like, say, Israel? I haven't read too much on the subject but my impression is that Israeli security relies more on plainclothes officers, human intelligence, and probably a healthy dose of racial profiling. On the other hand they have an excellent security record (so far). It does seem like the TSA approach of high-tech gadgets and low-skill people is designed to line the pockets of the security and defense industry, and put on an elaborate security theater to keep passengers paranoid and constantly mindful of a potential threat. At best it is a deterrent but with a 95% failure rate to find weapons, the TSA does not inspire a great deal of confidence in me that they could defeat a determined group of attackers on multiple planes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Malcolm posted:How does the TSA and the US screening system compare to other nations like, say, Israel? I haven't read too much on the subject but my impression is that Israeli security relies more on plainclothes officers, human intelligence, and probably a healthy dose of racial profiling. On the other hand they have an excellent security record (so far). It does seem like the TSA approach of high-tech gadgets and low-skill people is designed to line the pockets of the security and defense industry, and put on an elaborate security theater to keep passengers paranoid and constantly mindful of a potential threat. At best it is a deterrent but with a 95% failure rate to find weapons, the TSA does not inspire a great deal of confidence in me that they could defeat a determined group of attackers on multiple planes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I was traveling with a carry-on only, and had thrown my 4-D-cell mag-lite in my bag. TSA confiscated it, because "it could be used as a weapon." Maglites are pretty hefty and would be good for braining someone with. Really they probably just wanted to steal your sweet flashlight though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
chunkles posted:Really they probably just wanted to steal your sweet flashlight though. This is exactly right. It had an LED upgrade and everything. Sorry for the TSA derail. They don't even deserve that much recognition. Back to cool guys boring themselves nearly to death in airplanes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Do other countries have armed Air Marshals? Ever work with one on an international flight?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I was traveling with a carry-on only, and had thrown my 4-D-cell mag-lite in my bag. TSA confiscated it, because "it could be used as a weapon." They most DEFINITELY wanted a new light. This might be something to look into, but I believe you can ask them exactly where that is specified as a prohibited item, because that is shady as gently caress. quote:Jiro Kage, this is another really broad question, I know: At this point, given the incompetency you've described or alluded to at all levels of the FAM/TSA/keep airplanes safe department, do you think there's any plausible hope of fixing how things work and making them more effective without just starting from scratch, or is that kind of a lost cause, this is the best we're gonna get situation? I realize that depends on a lot of things, I'm just curious about your personal opinion. Well, I think there needs to be an institutional change within the TSA to start. Aside from firing a poo poo-ton of people, the organization needs to start hiring smarter people, while at the same time not trying to play some hosed up PR game at the same time. Right now, the screeners have literally no leeway - which is because they hire the bottom denominators usually. If they hired a higher caliber, say someone who could make an informed decision and who was given both the authority and responsibility to make a judgment call whether an item was a weapon then perhaps it would solve both of the problems at the same time. Unfortunately, I don't know if that is realistic or fiscally possible for the agency. Likewise, I don't know if they would be able to attract the people required for that. Perhaps hiring a few managers that were like that, they could keep the general screeners there and allow people to ask for a manager, and give the manager the ability to make that judgment call. I don't really know. I don't think anyone would say that we shouldn't have screening at all, and I think the real reason there is such a loving problem here is because we can't find a happy medium of security and ease of access. I personally think they need to more or less scrap everything and just start over - on the passenger screening side. From what I know on the employee and cargo side, they do pretty well, but then again, you aren't dealing with people. quote:How does the TSA and the US screening system compare to other nations like, say, Israel? I haven't read too much on the subject but my impression is that Israeli security relies more on plainclothes officers, human intelligence, and probably a healthy dose of racial profiling. On the other hand they have an excellent security record (so far). It does seem like the TSA approach of high-tech gadgets and low-skill people is designed to line the pockets of the security and defense industry, and put on an elaborate security theater to keep passengers paranoid and constantly mindful of a potential threat. At best it is a deterrent but with a 95% failure rate to find weapons, the TSA does not inspire a great deal of confidence in me that they could defeat a determined group of attackers on multiple planes. quote:I would imagine, offhand, that this has a lot to do with size of the country, population, number of airports/flights and the number of people traveling in and out at any point. According to Wikipedia, in 2014, Ben-Gurion airport had just under 15 million passengers total move through it, while JFK in New York had about 53 million. I would guess the reason why is their number of flights, yeah. I don't know what other FAM services are like in their screenings, but there are other services. There used to be a FAM conference every year, but I haven't heard of it happening in a while. The only thing you have to remember about Israel, especially with aviation security, is they have a lot more leeway to just throw someone off the plane if they don't like the person's name / information. The Israelis for the longest time kept telling our agency they wanted us to keep our firearms in their country, but of course the TSA was too scared of that. The Israeli service does focus a lot more on intelligence and pre-screening before the person even gets there, which is one of the issues I have with the FAM service that I will talk about later. You hit the nail on the head: the TSA acts like a PR machine, or a theater, while trying to be a security organization. You cannot do the security they need with kid gloves. quote:Sorry for the TSA derail. It's not a derail, it's valid issues, and the FAMS are a component of the TSA right now, although they shouldn't be, and have minimal interaction with the TSA normally. quote:Do other countries have armed Air Marshals? Ever work with one on an international flight? They sure do. Barring some very exclusive edge cases, we would never be on the same flight as a foreign FAM. It has to do with the country which the carrier is flagged. In that regard, our FAM office knows which flights are covered by other foreign FAMS, as we handle their arrival and departure. It's just like us - what flights and why they cover them are something that is not discussed, and we are not privy to just like they are not privy to why we picked certain flights.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
You probably can't exactly answer this directly, but what exactly would an Air Marshall do if they happened to be on a flight such as Air France 8969? Multiple heavily armed, bonkers terrorists that aren't afraid of killing passengers or being killed themselves. Basically worst worst case scenario.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Jiro Kage posted:They most DEFINITELY wanted a new light. This might be something to look into, but I believe you can ask them exactly where that is specified as a prohibited item, because that is shady as gently caress. They specifically prohibit things like billy clubs and nightsticks, and that flashlight is a ~15 inch metal tube filled with D-cell batteries. It's not too much of a stretch to see it getting prohibited as a club.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
You've said that FAMs are on flagged flights, as opposed to being randomly assigned. When you are on your flight, do you know ahead of time why it was flagged or who you should be looking out for? And, if you're able to answer, what type of situation would be cause to assign a FAM on board?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:... alarming other passengers because, hey someone has a knife on a plane. Then even if the flight crew says,hey don't worry about it, he's an air marshal, then the marshal's cover is still blown. Is this something that ever happens? Someone catching sight of an FAM's weapon and freaking out. I suspect a lot of people wouldn't exactly stay calm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Dick Bass posted:You probably can't exactly answer this directly, but what exactly would an Air Marshall do if they happened to be on a flight such as Air France 8969? I imagine there is a 'solution' for this... just not a solution John Q. Public would ever know the true story of  Initio posted:Is this something that ever happens? Someone catching sight of an FAM's weapon and freaking out. I suspect a lot of people wouldn't exactly stay calm. This probably ties in with the reason why two seperate countires FAM's wouldn't be on the same flight. Especially if they weren't aware of each other. This is a good question though and would like to hear OP's take
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Dr.Caligari posted:This probably ties in with the reason why two seperate countires FAM's wouldn't be on the same flight. I imagine that this is simply a jurisdiction issue. You're not going to have an American air marshal on a French flagged carrier just like you don't have the French National Police patrolling NYC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 00:59
|
|