Passenger Airliners

[BertiWooster]

The recent discovery of the package bound for an airpalne , was due to intelligence , rather than any checks at the airport .

I must say I never thought about the fact that passengers and luggage going inside the airline cabin was subjected to checks as opposed to luggage for the hold .

It does look like those that would wish us harm are changing tact .
Therefore the precaution of searching passengers and in flight luggage will be cancelled out by luggage going into the hold not been subjected to the same level of checks .

How do you get round that problem though - do you search evey piece of item going into the hold ?

All of a sudden airline travel is not looking appealing - are you worried ,. when you board your flight for your two weeks in spain ?

[237SJ]

Hold baggage is screened as well. Very definitely so.

[jno]

As I read it, the USA screens everything but Britain doesn't - they're more inclined to screen the shipping companies who send packages rather than the packages themselves. I would have thought this could and should change. But how do you make sure it's screened properly in Yemen before it leaves there for Britain?

[237SJ]

BertiWooster`s question was about passenger hold baggage on passenger aircraft so yes, it is screened.

[jno]

no it wasn't - he asks about searching every piece going into the hold. I assume he's talking about the recent situation involving unaccompanied hold baggage. This travels on passenger aircraft as well as cargo ones, and that actually happened in this case.

[237SJ]

Jno, it wasn`t unaccompanied hold baggage. Hold baggage doesn`t travel without the passenger. It`s a big no-no. I think he`s talking about cargo. The density of cargo in a container in the hold of an aircraft is huge and difficult to screen but it is done. There are lessons to be learned because terrorists will always try to find ways around safeguards which is why everyone needs to be vigilant and intelligence is the way to go.

[jno]

we may be arguing about words here, but as I understand it passengers' checked baggage and unaccompanied freight go in the same place on a passenger plane, whether you call it a hold or not. At least one of the bombs travelled on a passenger flight at one stage. I'm guessing that's what Berti has in mind.

[naomi24]

^^ That's right. Commercial 'Freight' is carried on all passenger planes along with passengers' checked luggage which is not allowed on without its owner.

[237SJ]

Sorry jno. Play on words. The problems the other day were on a UPS cargo aircraft that carry cargo only. Berti was talking about passenger aircraft that have hold baggage and cargo. Completely different kettle of fish

[MickyMacgraw]

I must admit that it does make uneasy thinking that the terrorists are constantly dreaming up new ways to attack us and have nearly done it again.

[237SJ]

You`re right Micky which is why we have to hope that intelligence is one step ahead of them. For thirty years the home office guidlines on hyjack situations was the same (for the airline crew) but nobody in their wildest dreams ever thought there would be such a thing as a suicide bomber. Times change, and we just have to keep on top of the situation, so to speak.

[jno]

237SJ, that's not entirely so: Qatar Airways are saying (at the moment) that they think one at least of the packets was on one of their passenger planes for a sector of the flight. Not everything goes on UPS cargo planes.

[237SJ]

I personally believe that the people in Yemen were trying out a dry run. There are (most of the time) three ways to detonate a bomb. A timer, tilt switch or barometic switch It wasn`t ever going to be a tilt switch, and probably not a barometic switch, so that leaves a timer or something that can be detonated by a mobile phone. It`s a little bit hit and miss as to whether someone can detonate a bomb on an aircraft when It`s many miles away due to the signal.

[Gromit]

It wa news to me that cargo not coonected to a passenger on the plane, flew on chartered aircraft. I thought the taking your shoes off, bending over and dropping your trolleys was all part of making sure that everything was screened. Now we learn apparently not - 'post' from anywhere in the world can accompany your flight. I 'm not exactly pleased about that. I would sooner mail and freight not connected to passenger did not travel on my plane.

[jno]

I did read somewhere (can't find the link) that they'd already done a dry run. We don't really know their plans, but it seems quite possible that they didn't even know the devices would be on cargo planes (as part of the time they weren't) and had hopes of blowing up a passenger flight in midair. And it might well have worked if someone hadn't talked - it seems clear that this was the only way the devices were found. So I do share Berti's concerns.

[237SJ]

Jno, how do you know the potential terrorists already did a dry run? Where`s the evidence?

[237SJ]

And we didn`t know the devices would`nt be on a passenger plane? There are so few commercial flights between Yemen and the UK/US are you sure the terrorists would have been sure their devices would have been on a passenger aircraft?

[BertiWooster]

My thoughts were , - when posting the question - that passengers are searched but their luggage going into the hold , wasn't .

I did also have in the back of my mind, the fact that , freight is carried in the hold , not belonging to anyone on board .

[jno]

I don't "know" anything! I can't read the minds of terrorists who haven't even been identified. But here's the link I couldn't find before about the suspected dry run

http://www.bbc.co.uk/...ld-us-canada-11671377

And no, I'm not "sure" what sort of plane they thought would carry their toner cartridges, for the same reason. I just said "it seems quite possible".