Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 512 posts

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#211

Post by tacon »

This is the part that really ticks me off:

>Charlotte Douglas International Airport in North Carolina recently said it had experienced three-hour wait times. [...] (T.S.A. officials denied that the wait had ever been that long, telling local reporters that it had been 75 minutes for a short time.)

Will someone, anyone, please write the simple app that you punch in as you start the line, you punch out as you leave screening, with some simple checks with GPS so we know you are really in one location for that time? Aggregate the data and let people coming to the airport have an idea of how long the wait will be. Use the data as political leverage so the TSA cannot claim "well, the wait wasn't that long". Tell people in line to install the app while they wait, and assure them that their politicians will see the data.

Probably not much money in this, but your app will go viral this summer, apparently...

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#212

Post by nobody_nowhere »

fblp wrote: post #197

I find it absurd that a central agency manages the hiring of tsa agents. In Canada and Australia the airports hire private security to do the checks. They are more competent and friendly than tsa agents. It's also not obvious how a government run tsa could be trusted any more than regulated private security contractors (overseen and kept accountable by a smaller government agency).

Ironic that the "smaller government" party implemented this system after 9/11 then, no?

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#213

Post by SystemOut »

koolba wrote: post #99
tehwebguy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was from League of Leagends (Sivir). It's not sharp or aerodynamic, just a "spinner" toy. One of the vendors from the League convention I put on gave it to me as a token of thanks just before the event ended. I dropped it in my bag and forgot it until flying a few weeks later. Bonus: My business partner was given the same one and the same thing happened at BUR. TSA asked if she wanted to mail it home, she said "to…

> Bonus: My business partner was given the same one and the same thing happened at BUR. TSA asked if she wanted to mail it home, she said "toss it" and never heard another word! Free business idea! UPS/FedEx/USPS packaging site at the end of the TSA line. When they say you can't take your cologne, knife, or toothbrush because it's too dangerous, you can immediately give it one of our helpful agents and they'll instea…

They have this option in Seattle already

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#214

Post by ihsw »

enraged_camel wrote: post #187
superuser2 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please fund them fully or eliminate them entirely. The inbetween states just suck for everybody.

What will funding them "fully" accomplish? Do you believe that their inability to catch terrorists is a matter of lack of funding?

Terrorism is irrelevant at this point.

The wait times must be reduced regardless.

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#215

Post by knz »

JadeNB wrote: post #185
knz wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point was more that everyone pays the same fee to be screened by the TSA but by purchasing a more expensive ticket from the airlines you can avoid the long wait to be screened and therefore increase the wait time for most people. To be clear, purchasing a higher fare ticket does not mean you are paying the TSA for better service.

> you can avoid the long wait to be screened and therefore increase the wait time for most people. Wait, what? I am always frustrated at seeing the folks in those shorter lines (though I settle down at roughly the point of view others have expressed in this thread, that paying for shorter lines is a fact of all parts of life and doesn't seem to abrogate any fundamental right of mine), but it has never occurred to me…

I'm not talking about precheck. At my local airport (and others I have been to) there is a regular TSA line with one screener at the end of the line. Once you clear the ID and ticket check you go into multiple lines for the scanner/bag check. Some airports have a separate line for business customers that goes straight to the ID/ticket check. We all pay the same fixed TSA fee ($2.50 I think) but they get to bypass the main line simply because they purchased a more expensive ticket from the airline (not the TSA). If I'm number 50 in line and 5 passengers get let in before me, then I'm now number 55 in line...

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#216

Post by dragonwriter »

eastbayjake wrote: post #210
vinay427 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly off-topic, but just to clarify Miami requires everyone to go through security again for an international connection, or was this a special case?

You have to go through security again for international flights that connect to a domestic flight, but not usually (ever?) if you've passed TSA within the US and are connecting to leave the country. That's true at every airport in the US, not just Miami.

> You have to go through security again for international flights that connect to a domestic flight, but not usually (ever?) if you've passed TSA within the US and are connecting to leave the country.

There are lots of times when with domestic -> international flights (or even domestic -> domestic, in some cases) there would be terminal transfers required that would leave the secured zone and thus require passing through security again incidentally, even without a specific policy.

Several airports where I know this was an issue have been redesigned to alleviate this, but I'm sure there are some where it is still an issue.

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#217

Post by dntrkv »

sneak wrote: post #29
vincefutr23 wrote: post #4

Blaming volume? How about 1) the switch from metal detectors to less numerous and slower body scanners? 2) the allocation of employee resources to the "pre check" line leaving less staff for 90% of travelers. 3) still having to take belts and shoes off even with a full body scan? This program has gotten seriously out of hand and is incredibly frustrating. I don't care if it's 3 hours or "75 minutes" anything over 15…

Body searches to travel without suspicion of wrongdoing are absurd, period.

You are free to travel without body searches, just not on an airplane.

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#218

Post by icelancer »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #192
CaptainZapp wrote: post #24

This, in combination with American airports being completely ignorant to the transit concept must cost American airline companies dozens, if not hundreds of millions a year in lost revenues. Case in point: if I want to to fly from Zurich to Lima I have essentially two choices: I can connect either in Amsterdam, or in Madrid. Madrids legal connection time is 55 minutes max (on Iberia). In AMS on KLM it's a maximum of…

Oh come on. I fly through Europe twice to three times a year. The transfer from Charles de Gaulle is a nightmare worse than any major US airport. They literally make you leave the security area and go through security for simple transfers if you're coming from the states. That's shit design right there. A lot of international connections are terrible and knowing which airports/airlines do a good job is important. Its…

Agreed. CDG is worse than almost any US airport. SEA is up there with the worst in the world though. It's only tolerable for me because I have NEXUS/Global Entry/TSA PRE.

Re: Catching a Flight? Budget Hours, Not Minutes, for Security

#219

Post by brooklyndavs »

chrisbennet wrote: post #66
creshal wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$7 billion a year just for the TSA budget. That's not counting all the indirect economic losses from the security theatre.

Or deaths due to people driving instead of flying. "Increased delays and added costs at U.S. airports due to new security procedures provide incentive for many short-haul passengers to drive to their destination rather than flying, and, since driving is far riskier than air travel, the extra automobile traffic generated has been estimated in one study to result in 500 or more extra road fatalities per year." https://…

Maybe this will get enough people to FINALLY start demanding funding for high speed rail corridors. I can't imaging getting to the airport, waiting in line for like 2 hours and then getting on a 45 min flight to Portland from Seattle.

Its crazy that the US doesn't have true high speed rail on the northeast corridor and the other high speed rail corridors identified such as between Chicago and St. Louis. Many other counties have HSR so its obviously a matter of priorities.

I know the current California HSR project is a bit of a mess but instead of abandoning HSR altogether we should find out why it's a mess and try to streamline projects like this going forward.

Hyperloop will be cool once/if its built, but for now HSR is the only game in town for fast ground transportation that moves a lot of people.

Post reply on HN