Aviation critic Michael Boyd says that terrorists will just put bombs

[Eric J in MN]

...made with liquids in checked luggage, and the ban on liquids in carry-on won't help:
http://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/aviation-critic-michael-boyd-details.html

[democracyindanger]

1. Or even more likely

a suicide bomber will set himself off in a massive bottleneck created by these asinine "security" measures.

When I saw pictures of the huge lines of people waiting to go through security at airports the past few days, three words popped into my head: Marine barracks, Beirut.

[purduejake]

3. ORD has virtually no lines....

So where are these huge lines? We only had a problem the first day - business as usual for the most part, although we see a lot more checked bags.

[democracyindanger]

5. ATL

I heard Laguardia had their shit together on Friday, but Atlanta's Hartsfield was a mess. I'm traveling on business tomorrow--the company travel agency warned us to be there 3 hours early and expect to be in line for 2 hours.

[Debau2005]

8. ATL

is a mess on a good day! I am sure it is a huge cluster now. They NEVER have their shit together...

[purduejake]

14. Haha, ATL is a mess...

I was SURPRISED to walk into work yesterday at 10AM and there was hardly anybody in line. In fact, it was better than normal since we called in a ton of overtime.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. I thought the same thing. "The terrorist" are so determined the

next step is banning liquids at football games he he. I'm sure that will be politically popular.

[rzemanfl]

9. The stampede that followed would probably kill more people

than the bomb. The people responsible for our safety are crazy.

[Kagemusha]

2. Maybe they should put trackers in liquid explosives then.

But that'd cost too much money. A whopping $6 million. Or so I've heard.

[Webster Green]

4. We're talking home brew stuff here...

Little of this, little of that.....Blamo!

[Eric J in MN]

10. Michael Boyd said that a terrorist could use his cellphone

...to detonate a bomb in checked luggage.

[TheMadMonk]

7. I believe you're talking of taggets.

Tiny pieces of marked plastic embeded in commercially manufactured explosives which can be used to identify manufacturer, batch number and place of purchase.

Short of getting the terrorists to add taggets themselves, there is no such way of identifying explosives manufactured in the kitchen sink.

[Merlot]

11. By doing these searches, aren't we tipping our hand?

We tell the terrorists exactly what we are looking for and how we're looking for it. So they know. Now all they need to do is figure out another way to get the stuff on a plane.

In the meantime, we've inconvienced and scared the public. Mission Accomplished again, gwb!

[Jazz2006]

12. If that's the case, what is his suggestion?

Banning all liquids and makeup and gels and toothpaste even in checked baggage? And banning all electronic devices that might be used as detonators on board?

It's easy to criticize; it's easy to say "not enough has been done"; it's easy to say "we need more accountability"; and all of those are obvious. But... I didn't see anything in that clip addressing the very question which he raises by virtue of his alternate scenario, which is, "So, what would you put in place to prevent the very thing that you say could be done? (i.e. terrorists checking liquids in their checked baggage that could be detonated by a cell phone carried on board).

And, as an aside, re: the carry on luggage issue...

I've thought about this and would actually welcome restrictions on carry on baggage, but for selfish reasons that have nothing to do with terrorist plots. Frankly, I think that banning carry on baggage would speed up check in, would spare me from having to deal with those people who block the aisles during boarding while trying to stuff their maximum size bags into the overhead compartments, would spare me having to deal with those people who think that it's okay to take up all of the overhead space above my row as well as their own because they've overloaded themselves with carryons to avoid having to check their luggage in the first place; and would give me a darned good excuse not to have to work through a flight. Instead, I could enjoy the movie or the music and not feel as though I should be spending that time working just because in recent years, we are able to, even in flight.

Overhead compartments could instead be used to hold airline supplied water bottles, books, magazines, blankets, pillows, and the toiletry pouches that used to be a standard freebie back in the day, etc. I see some potential here. I think it's possible that the cost savings resulting from the vastly reduced search requirements at check-in could easily exceed the cost of providing water and toiletries onboard. But the biggest bonus would be, as mentioned above, that if I can't work on my laptop, I have the perfect excuse to read a book or watch a movie instead.

Just thinking out loud here, but is it so difficult to imagine life without overhead bins full of carry on luggage, the vast majority of which is non-essential? I travel a lot, and I am as used to the conveniences as anyone, but would I give up my laptop and blackberry and my carry on for the duration of the flight if it would save me an hour or more in line at check in and provide these side benefits? Yes, definitely.

[flyarm]

15. understand this right now 100% of carryons are being checked

less than 10% going in the bellies of the planes are being checked..with the same type people checking your carry on's!!

and that includes luggage, cargo, mail..pkgs.. thats 10% of everything going in the belly!

feel warm and fuzzy yet?/

fly

[Jazz2006]

16. I don't think that was in any way responsive to

my post, but perhaps you can elaborate?

The video linked did not address solutions at all, as far as I can see, nor did your response.

And, if I'm not mistaken, (based on your prior posts on other threads), you used to be a flight attendant and some of your colleagues died in the attacks of September 11, 2001.

So, what would you suggest as a solution to protect your former colleagues and the passengers that you used to serve? Greater vigilance? Less? Let all the carry on luggage through? Take some precautionary measures with carry on luggage? Ban it all? Some other compromise?

It's a wide field, I agree, with a wide spectrum of alternatives. But as a former flight attendant whose colleagues died that day, what measures do you think are sufficient or justified to protect them?

Edit to add: "on other threads" in line three to avoid confusion. Edit to add: line two because the response didn't address my post at all, really.

[LostinVA]

13. That's what I said in a thread I started yesterday

How the heck is taking someone's contact SALINE or a granny's lipstick away going to stop bombs in the belly of a plane? It won't.

[Sgent]

17. You do it like

El Al does it -- passenger interviews, multiple screens, psychological profiling, etc.

Even if you ban all carryons, its not a serious problem for a terrorist to get explosives onto a plane. Familiar with pacemakers and saline breast implants? That's a detonator and 1L of explosive right there (500ml per side).