The discussion was about the safety of small jets. Small certified jets = corporate. The safety record of that segment of aviation is probably the best there is. Why do you think they have such a huge price tag? Plenty of redundancy systems. State-of-the-art avionics, engines, interiors, everything! They have speed, range, payload and the possibility to operate from runways where a wide-body couldn't even taxi. Mechanical failures on those planes are nearly non-existent. If the builder finds out some defects (unlikely) he issues an A.D. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airworthiness_Directive and until that AD has been fixed the plane cannot fly. Airplanes, when properly maintained and kept within their normal flight envelope, do not fail. Pilots do.
I thought about this one too - but sadly it has a couple of fatal flaws. First problem with this is that currently once you are in the "secure area" of the airport everyone is cleared at the same security level. That's why you glide right through when it is time to board. Because you'd have two (or more) security groups now -- airports would have to segregate passengers further or do screening on boarding. Nightmare for airports - and more holes to slip through. Second bigger problem is that the big issue is weaponizing a plane and using it as a WMD. TSA is not trying to make you the individual traveler safer. Think about that for a sec and you'll see why they are going to screen everyone to the max. Once we have an "incident" with a private jet they'll probably force those passengers to get screened too.
Here is more TSA outrage. TSA security theater doesn't provide real safety. TSA & other airport personel are not screened. http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=5652&cpage=1
exactly. A recent article showed that dogs are more effective at detecting bombs in Iraq after millions were spent on many technological alternatives. Also what if a TSA agent is compromised and lets someone through. A dog or scanner cannot be convinced to let someone through. It should be either dog or scanner not agent or scanner.
I think the scanners would be more effective and cause less controversy if they were modified to scan down to the bone level. This would make them more effective since it could then detect bombs and other implants in body cavities as well as find the external stuff like knives or guns. It would be less controversial since it wouldn't be showing people's body parts. I think dogs should then be used in addition to these deep scanners to help detect "soft" contraband materials.
Everyday Amerika becomes more of police state. If we really wanted to stop the problem we would go the route of El Al airlines. This is more about Big Brother and Chertoff making millions than our safety. http://gawker.com/5437499/why-is-michael-chertoff-so-excited-about-full+body-scanners http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-11/...ort-security-isaac-yeffet-el-al?_s=PM:OPINION
"just buy a ticket and take your seat" ---- Yeah, OK ...and what insurance company on this planet will insure an airline with virtually no security checks. Any other other dumbass ideas up your sleeve?
Air travelers in the United States are now given two options at the security gate -- be groin-groped by gloved Transportation Security Administration agents, or photographed "naked" in the back-scatter X-ray device that Jeffrey Goldberg at The Atlantic calls "the porn machine." You can thank failed "underwear bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab for this one. While armies tragically tend to fight the last war, the TSA looks for the item the most recent terrorist used. After 9/11, everything sharp -- even tweezers -- was banned. Ever since Richard Reid tried and failed to light his loafers on fire, security agents have forced us to take off our shoes. British authorities rounded up terrorists who planned to bring liquid explosives on board, and we've all been prohibited from carrying shampoo through the gate ever since. Terrorists have yet to use the same weapon twice, and the TSA isn't even looking for whatever they'll try to use next. I can think of all sorts of things a person could use to wreak havoc on a plane that aren't banned. Security officials should pay less attention to objects, and more attention to people. The Israelis do. They are, out of dreadful necessity, the world's foremost experts in counterterrorism. And they couldn't care less about what your grandmother brings on a plane. Instead, officials at Ben Gurion International Airport interview everyone in line before they're even allowed to check in. And Israeli officials profile. They don't profile racially, but they profile. Israeli Arabs breeze through rather quickly, but thanks to the dozens of dubious-looking stamps in my passport -- almost half are from Lebanon and Iraq -- I get pulled off to the side for more questioning every time. And I'm a white, nominally Christian American. If they pull you aside, you had better tell them the truth. They'll ask you so many wildly unpredictable questions so quickly, you couldn't possibly invent a fake story and keep it all straight. Don't even try. They're highly trained and experienced, and they catch everyone who tries to pull something over on them. Because I fit one of their profiles, it takes me 15 or 20 minutes longer to get through the first wave of security than it does for most people. The agents make up for it, though, by escorting me to the front of the line at the metal detector. They don't put anyone into a "porn machine." There's no point. Terrorists can't penetrate that deeply into the airport. The Israeli experience isn't pleasant, exactly, and there's a lot not to like about it. It can be exasperating for those of us who are interrogated more thoroughly. The system has its advantages, though, aside from the fact that no one looks or reaches into anyone's pants. Israelis don't use security theater to make passengers feel like they're safe. They use real security measures to ensure that travelers actually are safe. Even when suicide bombers exploded themselves almost daily in Israeli cities, not a single one managed to get through that airport. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio...machines_NQAJ5DOzf187gdRQnLURlO#ixzz15sSqNpDO