Aviation security gets a 'gentleman's C'

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: kelley <kelley () rakfoundry com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:19:08 -0500
To: <dave () farber net>
Subject: Aviation security gets a 'gentleman's C'

Dave,

I guess those of us who travel frequently won't be surprised. This week, an
airline pilot's group gave government and airline security programs failing
grades. The (rhetorical?) question is, will we simply get more 'nerf-based'
security?


Kelley

--

Ink Works: security and privacy awareness training
http://www.inkworkswell.com


Pilots' group: Aviation security programs failing

 From Mike M. Ahlers
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- An airline pilots group is giving dismal grades to
aviation security, saying "gaping holes" remain almost four years after the
September 11, 2001, terror attacks.

The group gives failing or near-failing grades to the government and
airlines for most aspects of security, from the airport perimeter to the
cockpit, concluding that security measures deserve a grade point average of
about 1.1.

The best grades go to two areas that have received a lot of attention.

Airport baggage screening received a grade of "B." Cockpit doors also
received a "B," although the group noted that strengthened cockpit doors
are not mandated in cargo planes of foreign carriers.

The "Aviation Security Report Card" was compiled by the Coalition of
Airline Pilots Associations, a trade association of five pilot unions that
represent 22,000 pilots. The Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations is
smaller, and it has tended to be more critical of government and industry
than the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 64,000 pilots at 41
airlines in the United States and Canada.

CAPA, for example, wants airlines to immediately install systems to counter
the threat of shoulder-fired systems, while ALPA says current anti-missile
systems are not suitable for deployment on commercial aircraft, a
conclusion also reached by RAND Corp. researchers.

"The technology exists, or could be updated, to address many of these
security problems," CAPA President Jon Safley said in a prepared statement.
"But neither the airlines, the airports nor government officials have given
these issues the priority they deserve."

About $5.6 billion of the Transportation Security Administration's $5.8
billion annual budget is directed toward aviation security.

The Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations grades 13 areas of security.
They are, from best to worse (comments reflect group's statements):

     * Screening bags: "B." Baggage screening has improved, but some
scanners still don't detect explosives.

     * Cockpit doors: "B." The reinforced doors work, but are not mandated
on cargo or foreign carriers.

     * Federal air marshals: "C." Air marshals do a good job, but there are
too few, and they cover a limited number of flights. The exact number of
air marshals is classified.

     * Crew training in classroom: "C." Security training varies widely
from airline to airline, and there is no program for cargo crews.

     * Perimeter security: "D." There is a lack of Transportation Security
Administration oversight, and security is inconsistent from airport to
airport.

     * Threat intelligence: "D." Few airlines share crucial threat updates
with their pilots.

     * Pilots with Guns (on passenger planes): "D." The Federal Flight Deck
Officer program, which trains pilots to carry handguns while in the
cockpit, has "poor operational policies" that limit participation. There is
only one facility that trains the pilots. The Coalition of Airline Pilots
Association also opposes a requirement that dead-heading pilots -- pilots
traveling as passengers -- keep their weapons in locked boxes in the
plane's cargo area.

     * Pilots with guns (on cargo aircraft): "D." The Federal Flight Deck
Officer program for cargo pilots has just started, and numbers are limited.

     * Screening passengers and employees: "C/F." There is little
explosives screening for passengers, and employees are not screened.

     * Screening cargo: "F." The near-total reliance on a "known shipper"
program is a serious flaw. "We don't care who the shipper is, we want to
know what's in the box," Safley said.

     * Credentialing: "F." Available biometric identification technology
has yet to be deployed by the TSA.

     * Crew training -- self-defense: "F." Vital hands-on training is not
mandatory, and thus neglected.

     * Missile defense: "F." Shoulder-fired missiles are a serious threat
even though countermeasures do exist.

       Safley said the report card reflects a consensus of opinion from the
leaders of CAPA's member unions. The group represents five unions, whose
pilots fly for American, Southwest, ABX Air, AirTran and UPS.

       The 9/11 Commission, the independent group that investigated the
September 11 attacks, also has criticized aviation spending, saying the
money has been spent mainly to meet congressional mandates, and that
current efforts "do not yet reflect a forward-looking strategic plan
systematically analyzing assets, risks, costs, and benefits."

       Last week, the TSA released a survey saying that travelers gave
"consistently high marks" to security screeners.

       Between 80 percent and 95 percent of passengers gave positive
responses when asked about seven aspects of the federal security screening
process, which included thoroughness and courtesy of screeners as well as
confidence in the ability of TSA to keep air travel secure.


Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/03/10/aviation.security


------ End of Forwarded Message



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/