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

81–90 of 512 posts

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

#81

Post by knz »

sneak wrote: post #45
hashkb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just go get pre check?

TSA Pre is the equivalent of "fuck you, got mine". It makes it personally more convenient for you , while simultaneously ignoring or condoning the waste of millions of person-hours without consent, which basically equates to mass murder if you squnt hard enough at the math.

My "favourite" part of the TSA line is how business and premier customers often have access to a shorter regular TSA line (not precheck, just a separate entrance to the normal TSA line). My understanding is that the TSA is partly funded by a FIXED fee on every ticket so I can't see any logical reason as to why they get sent to the front of the line.

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

#82

Post by crispyambulance »

coderdude wrote: post #52
raldi wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of toy was it?

A standard-issue toy throwing star that every adult has on them when trying to get through security checkpoints.

Yep, the whole point for why pre-check exists is to allow frequent travelers who will always pass screening to get through the security clusterfuck faster. pre-check is for people that know how to travel and are willing to observe the rules.

A grown man carrying a "throwing-star" toy through pre-check SHOULD BE banned from this privilege and feel the scorn of other pre-check folks who just want to go through smoothly.

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

#83

Post by knowaveragejoe »

spyspy wrote: post #43
MichaelBurge wrote: post #39

I think Trump would abolish the TSA. Cruz has said he would, too. I'd like to see either one get in, though I wonder if the President should be able to just decide on his own to shut down an agency that Congress has approved. Why has Congress not shut it down? I don't think anybody really likes the TSA, so I can't imagine there'd be too much opposition to a bill abolishing them. It affects so many people you could pr…

But any politician that supported such a bill would be crucified if and when another terrorist attack occurs.

Additionally, they'd be vilified by the people who de facto support things like the TSA as "soft on security".

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

#84

Post by CaptainZapp »

MichaelBurge wrote: post #74
CaptainZapp wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, the TSA sucks big time and should be abolished. I get that. But what about the alternatives? In this day and age it's just not thinkable to let people enter a plane without a security check. So you need some entity performing it. I think one factor on providing successful and to the passenger acceptable (they will never be pleasant) security checks is adequate funding and employing adequately compensated professi…

I think the original plan was that the TSA would set some rules and make the airports comply with them, and the airports would be responsible for doing screenings. Somehow that got warped into government agents doing the work. Why is it 'unthinkable' to let people enter a plane without a security check? We let people get on a bus without a security check. If you're worried specifically about someone taking over the p…

Then we probably have to agree to disagree.

Air travel is in that sense special that you and up to 500 of your fellow passengers are in a metal tube in 12'000 metres height, which makes it conceptually a bit different from a bus, or even a train.

Cockpit doors are already re-inforced, but the cockpit is not the only sensitive part of a plane when a passenger wants to cause mayhem with a high powered rifle, or a - pistol.

In addition I, for one, prefer to take a flight without a bunch of open carry zealots believing that they have a god given rigth to take their guns everywhere and which would surely wind up armed on commercial flights.

But again, we seem to have a completely different opinion here and I have no urge to try to convince you why I don't think it's a good idea to abolish security checks for flights.

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

#85

Post by smoe »

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…

I once flew back from Costa Rica to Zürich via Miami, because I wasn't aware that unlike every other airport I have ever been, the US doesn't do transit. Since that horrific day I never went to Latin America via the US again, no matter how much cheaper it would have been.

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

#87

Post by scurvy »

rjsw wrote: post #51

Why hasn't the TSA reacted to the Brussels Airport bombing and stopped herding passengers together so that they present a big target to terrorists ?

I doubt that this will ever change. They're been herding passengers like this even after several check-in counter/queue terrorist attacks in the 60's and 70's.

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

#88

Post by KKKKkkkk1 »

tehwebguy wrote: post #25

Here's an awesome TSA story for you: Late last year while trying to fly out of LAX a TSA employee thought I was carrying a throwing star. They called the police, who correctly identified as a toy in seconds. I thought the whole ordeal was over until I got a "notice of violation" in the mail from TSA 45 days later. Now I'm banned from pre-check for three years, even though I have global entry and even though the fine…

The USCIS (the former Immigration and Naturalization Service) is a US government agency that functions without funding from the government - it gets all of its money from the fees and penalties paid by the people who require its services. Based on your story, I'm wondering if the TSA has a similar business model.

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

#89

Post by maxerickson »

geerlingguy wrote: post #80
freehunter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the reasons I love the Midwest and living in smaller cities. My airport is international and flies just about anywhere you want to go, but 90% of the time I walk up to an empty line and I'm told "we don't have a precheck lane open, just walk on through". As a consultant, I fly the busiest times (monday and thursday), but the only trouble I've ever had was in Denver where I waited almost an hour and a h…

With the exception of Chicago, I agree. St. Louis, Indianapolis, KC, and many other airports have direct flights to most parts of the US (or connect through Chicago almost anywhere in the world), and I've never waited more than 20 minutes in the TSA lines. Due to the frequency of travel, I do have Pre-Check, but I hate that I had to pay extra money to get what I think should be the normal experience for all domestic…

If 0 people had signed up for Pre-Check it would get shut down.

It's nicely described by the Prisoner's dilemma.

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

#90

Post by [deleted] »

harperlee wrote: post #18
jsnell wrote: post #3

How is coming to the airport earlier supposed to solve what's obviously a throughput problem? Sure, for an individual it reduces the chances they'll miss their flight. But if everyone does it, there's obviously no change. The only way showing up earlier would help with throughput is if there are periods of time where the security is under-utilized with absolutely no queues. Which, from my experience with US airports,…

If everyone comes a minute before departure, all lose the flight, whereas if everyone comes 24 hours earlier, none will miss the flight, so there is obviously a change. Plus you get people to sit in a huge store without any means to leave. So the airport doesn't have a throughput problem! They don't have a problem at all, as there is also no clear alternative - normally there is only 1 airport to choose from. So peop…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN