# Plane Angry: Air Travel at a Breaking Point



## MrFSS (Aug 12, 2010)

"It's no secret that the air travel experience — which includes the TSA experience, delays, cancellations — is not as comfortable as it could be," said Geoff Freeman, the executive vice president of the U.S. Travel Association, which represents the American tourism industry. Research by the association suggests that 41 million people are avoiding air travel every year because of the so-called "hassle factor."

Those hassles, from crowded planes to tightened security to fees for checked baggage, have made air travel an intolerably bad experience, which is why passengers are lashing out.

*Full Story*


----------



## rrdude (Aug 12, 2010)

MrFSS said:


> "It's no secret that the air travel experience — which includes the TSA experience, delays, cancellations — is not as comfortable as it could be," said Geoff Freeman, the executive vice president of the U.S. Travel Association, which represents the American tourism industry. Research by the association suggests that 41 million people are avoiding air travel every year because of the so-called "hassle factor."
> 
> Those hassles, from crowded planes to tightened security to fees for checked baggage, have made air travel an intolerably bad experience, which is why passengers are lashing out.
> 
> *Full Story*


Yeah, just ask former flight attendant Steven Slater.


----------



## Guest (Aug 12, 2010)

Exactly why we don't need the TSA and Homeland Security putting their Security Theater into the train stations!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 14, 2010)

If nearly everyone hates the TSA, from both the left and the right, then how are they able to continue to exist and even expand their powers and influence over us? Is that really how a democracy is supposed to work? Most of the time you can blame one of our two idiotic political parties for the lack of any resolution, but in this rare instance it seems nearly everyone is agreement yet nothing is ever done about it. Kind of makes you wonder if we're actually having any influence on our government at all.


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Aug 15, 2010)

It's like the TSA is a school yard bully and we are afraid to stand up to the bully.


----------



## rrdude (Aug 15, 2010)

amtrakwolverine said:


> It's like the TSA is a school yard bully and we are afraid to stand up to the bully.


Went thru the full-body-scanner at BWI last Friday, THEN a full-body-pat-down. I thought the point of the scanner was to avoid the pat-down?

Anyway, must have been a good day for TSA, cause they were all smiling, and actually pleasant.

Although, my feeling as I stood in the scanner and mimicked the TSA's employee's motions (at his request, "put arms 'this way', now put arms 'this way'....") I was uttering to myself, "never again". Alas, I will be forced to fly for business again, I'm sure.

But taking these frequent Surfliners while in the SoCal is sure nice, 'specially when Whooz Dome is part of the consist!

Best part is, only a few more days B4 CS-EB-CL AGR redemption begins!


----------



## Trogdor (Aug 15, 2010)

daxomni said:


> If nearly everyone hates the TSA, from both the left and the right, then how are they able to continue to exist and even expand their powers and influence over us? Is that really how a democracy is supposed to work? Most of the time you can blame one of our two idiotic political parties for the lack of any resolution, but in this rare instance it seems nearly everyone is agreement yet nothing is ever done about it. Kind of makes you wonder if we're actually having any influence on our government at all.


Where has it been said that "nearly everyone" wants to get rid of the TSA? Yes, plenty of people are irritated by the TSA (low-pay rent-a-cops), their ridiculous rules and regulations (3 ounces of a liquid are safe, but 4 ounces will bring down a plane), their security theater (don't worry about smiling for the camera, because our new x-ray vision can already see your teeth, not to mention your...well), etc.

However, the main problem is that our population has been sold this load of bull**** that says:

1) The more visible they make it, the more effective the security is

2) The only way to be visible is to be intrusive

3) The only way to solve prior failings (which often involved not following the existing rules) is to add more layers

4) Anyone who opposes spending gobzillions of dollars on this stuff just wants the terrorists to win

5) Anyone who really doesn't like dealing with the security theater can simply not fly (knowing full well that, with very few exceptions, not flying isn't really a practical alternative, unless you have the option of not going at all)

Yes, many of us who spend a lot of time thinking about it (that includes those that are into aviation, who have to deal with this annoyance on a regular basis, and those who are into rail, who are desperately hoping that said annoyance can stay the hell out of the passenger rail arena, as it's one of the advantages rail has over flying) realize that all this security theater is nonsense. But the average Joe doesn't spend a lot of time thinking about it. Average Joe likely takes it all at face value, and doesn't think about how much is being wasted by arriving at the airport 1-2 hours early, taking off his shoes, putting his three-ounce containers of liquids, lotions and gels into one one-ounce clear-plastic bag, etc. Hey, it's patriotic to follow those rules.

The typical person on the street doesn't think about the fact that a September 11-style hijacking really couldn't occur today for a few reasons that have nothing to do with security at the airport. First, if someone tries to hijack a plane in the US today, they're likely to have a good half the plane, at least, immediately come after them (and remember, the 9/11 hijackers didn't have guns or bombs, they had boxcutter knives). Second, cockpit doors have been reinforced, and new procedures put into place that control when the door can be opened (if you've sat at the front of a plane in the last few years, you'll notice what a big production it is just for one of the pilots to use the restroom now).

The most recent case that made headlines was the guy who stuffed explosives in his underwear last December. He should have never made it onto the plane, but for the fact that existing policies and procedures in place weren't followed.

However, despite all of that, the security theater expands for a couple of key reasons. First, *there's a bunch of money to be made in it.* You know all those machines aren't free. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think that the owners of the companies that make those machines spend a few dollars on lobbying and/or direct campaign donations. Second (and the most unfortunate fact of all, in my opinion), in politics, looking like you're doing something goes 100 times further than actually doing something.


----------



## rrdude (Aug 15, 2010)

Trogdor said:


> daxomni said:
> 
> 
> > If nearly everyone hates the TSA, from both the left and the right, then how are they able to continue to exist and even expand their powers and influence over us? Is that really how a democracy is supposed to work? Most of the time you can blame one of our two idiotic political parties for the lack of any resolution, but in this rare instance it seems nearly everyone is agreement yet nothing is ever done about it. Kind of makes you wonder if we're actually having any influence on our government at all.
> ...


Ditto.


----------



## George Harris (Aug 24, 2010)

And if you have metal in your body, you *KNOW* you are always going to get the full treatment.That is why our usual semi regular trip is by a 4 hour train ride even thoug the flight is only about 45 minutes gate to gate. Even if the price were the same, it would still be take the train. (Actually door to door it is about 5 hours by rail or about 3 hours by air.) Still get on the train no hassle, relax, read, maybe pull out the laptop and work, go grab some food, what's not to like?


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Aug 24, 2010)

SO if you have metal in your body and even have a doctors note and x-rays in hand they still going to give you the 6th degree? Screw that.


----------



## jis (Aug 24, 2010)

But then again it was on the Adirondack at Rouses Point that US CBP pulled a confused old man off the train after detecting radiation on him because the previous day he had the misfortune of having a Nuclear Stress Test in the afternoon, and there was residual radiation from that procedure detectable on him. Strange things happen.

Seems to me that they should be able to figure out a way of pre-certifying someone who has a permanent condition like a metal plate or bolt in ones body, like they do with any of the several trusted traveler program.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Aug 24, 2010)

jis said:


> But then again it was on the Adirondack at Rouses Point that US CBP pulled a confused old man off the train after detecting radiation on him because the previous day he had the misfortune of having a Nuclear Stress Test in the afternoon, and there was residual radiation from that procedure detectable on him. Strange things happen.
> 
> Seems to me that they should be able to figure out a way of pre-certifying someone who has a permanent condition like a metal plate or bolt in ones body, like they do with any of the several trusted traveler program.


That would be nice. My wife has a titanium hip, and always gets the 3rd degree. We reeeeealy hate it.


----------



## George Harris (Aug 25, 2010)

Wellll:

It would be profiling to take the most basic common sense approach to think, hey, these 60 plus year old people carrying the usual paraphenalia of the middle aged plus working and professional people have the metal they say they do in their body, or that an obviously elederly person has had medical procedures that leave residual radiation, and are no threat to anybody.

Hello, vacuum brains, use the head for something other than a hatrack.

One of my favorites is, a few years after my wife had her knee replacements, but before she had any other metal in her body, we were going through the susal security theatrep; and by now she had figured out that the metal detector caused residual knee pain that took several days to go away, so she had taken to asking for a hand check. She was wearing a skirt slightly past knee length. Thinking it would be obvious, she hitched it up enought to show the scars, with the explanation that this is where the metal is. The person says, "I don't know how to hand check a person wearing a dress."

What! Woman, you can see where it is. How do we make it clearer?


----------



## saxman (Aug 26, 2010)

From an airline employees perspective the passengers' themselves can also be the problem. Here's a little anecdote I had the other day with a passenger:

I was flying from JFK to Nantucket, MA last week. The airport in Nantucket is very busy in the summer and this day was no different. Like many small airports, all there is, is a small terminal, where you go and check in and then walk through security and then across the ramp to the aircraft. A very busy ramp with lots of spinning props and aircraft movement. In other words, no jet bridges either. Obviously you can't have crowds of people going astray for security reasons and more importantly, their own safety.

Well we land in Nantucket and because of this, passengers must wait onboard the aircraft while the valet-tagged bags are off loaded, then brought forward so the people can claim them. Then the people are escorted across the ramp to the terminal where they can claim the rest of their checked bags. The process takes about 6 to 8 minutes.

I go in with the passengers to use the facility before my flight back to JFK, and as I'm going in the restroom this older gentleman yells, "sir, sir!" I didn't hear him at first and when I do I stop and he asks if I flew him to Nantucket. I say yes, that was me. First he accuses me of running away from him when I never even heard him. Then he proceeds to pretty much yell at me for keeping him on the plane for 15 minutes and he wants an explanation of why "I" kept the passengers on the plane. I try to give him a simple explanation, but he didn't really understand and he tells me he'll be complaining to my airline about this "awful service." I'm a little surprised he didn't take my name, and ID number, but I would have gladly given it to him.  Keep in mind, they weren't kept on the plane for more than 5 minutes, plus we were on time if not a few minutes early arriving. I think it's actually pretty funny that this guy was so upset about being stuck on the plane for a whole 5 minutes, and I hope he does complain. If he does get a response, I'm sure they'll laugh about it.

I understand that things aren't so rosy with sparkles these days, but please find something real to complain about. Don't whine about having to sit an extra 5 minutes for your own safety, so you can get to your beach house sooner for the weekend. 

Just giving a little perspective from the "other side of things."


----------



## rrdude (Aug 26, 2010)

saxman said:


> From an airline employees perspective the passengers' themselves can also be the problem. Here's a little anecdote I had the other day with a passenger:
> 
> I was flying from JFK to Nantucket, MA last week. The airport in Nantucket is very busy in the summer and this day was no different. Like many small airports, all there is, is a small terminal, where you go and check in and then walk through security and then across the ramp to the aircraft. A very busy ramp with lots of spinning props and aircraft movement. In other words, no jet bridges either. Obviously you can't have crowds of people going astray for security reasons and more importantly, their own safety.
> 
> ...


Yes, it's always good to see things from "the other side". And it may seem to casual or new posters here, that there is a lot of complaining about Amtrak service on board, or lack of it.

However, after being a regular reader/poster for the better part of a year now, I'd have to say that most posts regarding service issues seem to have some merit. Amtrak's poor reputation for service didn't happen in a vacuum, and unfortunately, it will take years to change the image that the general public seems to have.

As stated in another post, I was pleasantly surprised on my recent cross country trip that I DIDN'T encounter really bad/rude service. Granted, my expectations were rather low, but at least I was surprised.


----------

