ANTI TERRORIST AND SECURITY RULES ARE BECOMING COMPLETELY REDICULOUS.......

[ramblingboy42]

I really think the Police and security forces are directing their controls in the wrong areas.
Murwillumbah Banana Festival forced to cancel annual street parade due to cost of anti-terror rules - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-26/how-anti-terror-rules-shut-down-banana-festival-street-parade/11245390)

[DiscoMick]

Did you see that some rural airports may have to close down because the federal government is insisting on scanners and other gear, but refusing to pay for them and making broke local councils foot the bill?

[roverrescue]

The terrorists won on November 11

Gutless society should have said

“This is **** - we don’t condone
The death of a few thousand people for the means of a minority”

Instead - the “developed” world pretended that a few thousand deaths equates to the end of all freedom....

When a bully fronts up and flicks your vegemite sandwich into the dirt do you run and tell the teacher or line up a 3:05 show down?

S

[goingbush]

Did you see that some rural airports may have to close down because the federal government is insisting on scanners and other gear, but refusing to pay for them and making broke local councils foot the bill?

Maybe why Moira Shire wants to sell the Yarrawonga Airport, Ive been wanting to buy a Hangar there but its limbo land at the moment.

[BradC]

I really think the Police and security forces are directing their controls in the wrong areas.

The problem is a lack of understanding of a risk and threat assessment process. Because that is fundamentally misunderstood, rather than guidelines and best practice, we get prescriptive and mandatory blanket rules. There is no allowance for critical thought.

This results in the "security theatre" we often see in airports whereby I can't take a screwdriver in my carry-on, but can carry an insertion thermometer with a razor sharp point.

It also results in the lunacy in the linked article because nobody has the balls (or nouse) to sit with the authorities and actually do a proper risk and threat assessment on the parade and process. Instead you get "Here's the book with the list of things you must do. Do them and we'll let you run the parade".

If the risk is real and nobody is willing to sign off on the residual risk, then by all means implement mitigation. When it comes to mitigation there are many ways to divest the feline of its pelt. It's not just "bollards and police cars".

(In my very best Eric Idle voice) Oooooo it makes me mad.

[101RRS]

The terrorists won on November 11



What happened on November 11?

[Arapiles]

I would've thought that they could use the orange, water filled traffic bollards - why are they talking about putting in place concrete bollards?

BTW, my kids were on Bourke Street when that idiot decided to drive down the footpath, and he ended up just outside my building, so don't think that it's that far-fetched, and it doesn't have to be ISIS.

[V8Ian]

What happened on November 11?
It was Harry Connick's birthday.

[Homestar]

What happened on November 11?

-WW1 ended
-US President Benjamin Harrison declared Washington the forty-second state in the Union
-Flavius Valerius Severus, compassionate Emperor of Rome, died

[Homestar]

I would've thought that they could use the orange, water filled traffic bollards - why are they talking about putting in place concrete bollards?

BTW, my kids were on Bourke Street when that idiot decided to drive down the footpath, and he ended up just outside my building, so don't think that it's that far-fetched, and it doesn't have to be ISIS.

Still very expensive to deploy water barriers, have them filled and emptied. Similar cost for a short term job. Probably needs doing after hours too, in and out quickly - concrete is easier, and they probably only need to cover areas where vehicles can enter from side streets, etc so one or two bits of concrete per area would probably cover it - expensive from whichever angle unfortunately.

[cjc_td5]

I would've thought that they could use the orange, water filled traffic bollards - why are they talking about putting in place concrete bollards?

BTW, my kids were on Bourke Street when that idiot decided to drive down the footpath, and he ended up just outside my building, so don't think that it's that far-fetched, and it doesn't have to be ISIS.

I don't think the water filled barricades are compliant as traffic barriers anymore. Someone did a risk assessment that they could leak and therefore become ineffective, so their use was banned. If used empty they become lethal projectiles if hit with any speed. That is why the compliant barriers have steel cables running along them to tie them all together. Concrete barricades remove this risk.

[AndyG]

Did you see that some rural airports may have to close down because the federal government is insisting on scanners and other gear, but refusing to pay for them and making broke local councils foot the bill?

It's a hard call, i would have thought a quick rummage through the carry on would suffice , but ... Mike i see your often critical of subsidies, should not it be on the basis of user pays, rather than yet another Federal subsidy.

But seriously if you were that way inclined, there are so many options in a modern mechanised society, like, first hire a gravel truck .......................

[BradC]

Did you see that some rural airports may have to close down because the federal government is insisting on scanners and other gear, but refusing to pay for them and making broke local councils foot the bill?

That's not entirely correct.

The federal government is going to provide a grant to supply and install the required equipment. What they are *not* going to do is pay the ongoing staffing required to operate said equipment, nor pay for the ongoing maintenance (which with both X-ray and ETD is non-trivial).

So the airport will have to stump up the ongoing operating costs. This *will* drive some airports under as the only way to finance it on a stand-alone basis will be to increase landing fees which will make it less viable for the airlines as the knock-on will drive tickets up and passenger counts down. End result airline declares route unsustainable and pulls out.

We've already lost a few useful regional routes in WA due to them being unsustainable for the airline. There really are two options. A : We subsidise the routes or B : they get shut down.

(A) is going to require some good negotiation with the airline and serious independent oversight as we've seen time and time again any subsidy has serious potential for rort.

[JDNSW]

Perhaps needs to be pointed out that the security requirement is primarily to protect travellers from the capital city airports, not the regional airports. There has been no credible data to suggest that there is a risk to regional flights.

[Saitch]

Lets see now. 20,000 AULRO members @ $1,000 ea. = $20 million.
We could purchase a couple of old Dash 8s and revive the old ANA emblem but, to overcome the security costs, it would be signifying

"AUSTRALIAN NUDE AIRLINES"


Incisor could then possibly be known as "Branson of the Outback".

[V8Ian]

Lets see now. 20,000 AULRO members @ $1,000 ea. = $20 million.
We could purchase a couple of old Dash 8s and revive the old ANA emblem but, to overcome the security costs, it would be signifying

"AUSTRALIAN NUDE AIRLINES"


Incisor could then possibly be known as "Branson of the Outback".
Add a bit for driptrays. 20,001 AULROians?

[Homestar]

I don't think the water filled barricades are compliant as traffic barriers anymore. Someone did a risk assessment that they could leak and therefore become ineffective, so their use was banned. If used empty they become lethal projectiles if hit with any speed. That is why the compliant barriers have steel cables running along them to tie them all together. Concrete barricades remove this risk.

Water filled plastic barriers of the appropriate type can be used in zones rated up to 70KPH for TL2 rated units and 100KPH for TL3 rated units, or as end treatments for steel or concrete barriers. We have literally thousands of them out at the moment doing their thing. They are pinned together so one leak in a chain makes no difference. Deflection distance is greater than pinned steel or concrete but they are still quite legal. They are also approved and suitable as terrorist mitigation if installed to standards (filled with water and pinned together with supplied collars).

You may be thinking of the older style TL1 water filled units, these are no longer suitable for traffic use.

We have found for small installations that need to be in and out quickly that concrete is a easier, but as you can get much less on a truck, about the same price as deploying water filled units and filling/draining them. Our installation team do terrorist mitigation on an almost weekly basis.

[DiscoMick]

That's not entirely correct.

The federal government is going to provide a grant to supply and install the required equipment. What they are *not* going to do is pay the ongoing staffing required to operate said equipment, nor pay for the ongoing maintenance (which with both X-ray and ETD is non-trivial).

So the airport will have to stump up the ongoing operating costs. This *will* drive some airports under as the only way to finance it on a stand-alone basis will be to increase landing fees which will make it less viable for the airlines as the knock-on will drive tickets up and passenger counts down. End result airline declares route unsustainable and pulls out.

We've already lost a few useful regional routes in WA due to them being unsustainable for the airline. There really are two options. A : We subsidise the routes or B : they get shut down.

(A) is going to require some good negotiation with the airline and serious independent oversight as we've seen time and time again any subsidy has serious potential for rort.Yes, I guess regional airports can't make much income from other sources, such as parking. Coffs airport has a fully automated building which provides secure parking, but that probably wouldn't work at smaller airports.

[JDNSW]

Yes. There are currently air services to a lot of places that only drop off/pick up a few passengers each flight. These sorts of requirements effectively mean the airlines will simply not be able to service these towns.

[Pickles2]

Perhaps needs to be pointed out that the security requirement is primarily to protect travellers from the capital city airports, not the regional airports. There has been no credible data to suggest that there is a risk to regional flights.
"Not Regional Airports"?.....Not yet.
The Scum that plan & do attempt, & sometimes succeed, to action their plan, could turn up anywhere, and IMHO could decide to target any sort of "Regional Area", not just airports, because they may see easier opportunities in these locations.
I have no solutions at all, other than to keep a very positive watch on ANY potential perpetrators, who if found guilty of any offences at all, should immediately face a very long prison sentence, &, if appropriate, immediate deportation.
I believe there are risks everywhere now.
All only IMHO of course, Pickles.

[BradC]

"Not Regional Airports"?.....Not yet.
The Scum that plan & do attempt, & sometimes succeed, to action their plan, could turn up anywhere, and IMHO could decide to target any sort of "Regional Area", not just airports, because they may see easier opportunities in these locations.

The real problem is that regional and major routes all intersect at major airports. The regionals come in to the same terminal, so Fred decants from a Dash-8 and go straight into the lounge to transfer onto a 737 to haul across the country. Fred is carrying something nasty which he carried onto the regional with the 6 other passengers and is now not re-screened before he gets onto the bigger aircraft.

Frankly the solution is to re-screen transit passengers from regionals before they get into the lounge (just like every major international terminal does when the source and destination countries screening rules are incompatible), but that would upset the major terminals / airlines (read cause them extra cost which the can, but won't bear) so they push it out to the regions and put them out of business.

A bit the same as when members of ICAO loosened the ban on metal knives on aircraft, but as Qantas had years worth of stock of plastic knives they strong-armed CASA into keeping the regulation to force their use.

There ya go, I've entered the realm of conspiracy theory and the devolution of the thread is complete.

[DiscoMick]

Major airports should screen everyone. Regional airports can't afford to do it.

[BradC]

Major airports should screen everyone. Regional airports can't afford to do it.

I don't disagree with you at all. There would be some reconfiguration of the lounges required but in Perth (for example) it could be relatively well managed on the domestic side using the current configuration based on the old terminal split up. It would mean however bags would need to be re-screened as part of the baggage process.

No different however to flying in domestic and doing an international transfer when you think about it. It's just another level in the screening process.

The other non-obvious headache (unless you do this sort of thing and are exposed to it) is these regional airports suddenly need extra admin staff to keep a transport security plan up to date and commit to regular audits and reviews. Then there is the operational documentation. It becomes quite onerous.

[Bigbjorn]

Yes. There are currently air services to a lot of places that only drop off/pick up a few passengers each flight. These sorts of requirements effectively mean the airlines will simply not be able to service these towns.

Indeed. The last time I flew Brisbane-Longreach-Winton I was the only passenger on the Longreach-Winton leg. Full plane left Brisbane and two thirds deplaned at Emerald and all remaining bar me got off at Longreach. The fare was hair-raising. Not so on all routes. A while ago I needed to get to Mt. Isa urgently. Brisbane-Mt. Isa flights were booked out three weeks ahead so I had no alternative but to drive. My memory of the fare was that I could have gone to London for less.

[JDNSW]

I am reminded of the time (many years ago we had to get a mechanic to Mt Isa to fix some machinery. Couldn't drive because the roads were cut (wet season), and he had to cool his heels in Townsville for several days, the flights to Mt Isa being booked out. When he finally got on the Friendship he realised why - he was one of six passengers; all the other seats were occupied by nine gallon kegs, strapped in.

I'm not sure they'd get away with that these days!

[jonesfam]

Are they talking about all airports?
In Doomadgee we have 2 blokes who do the whole thing, safety, airport inspections, unload, load, chek-in everything.
To have people trained in security etc, where do they come from?
Where do they live? All the housing here is council or government owned, except a few leased places like the Roadhouse.
I just don't see how that would work in a place like this.

I regularly forget to take off my Leatherman when I fly out. I got into quite an argument at Weipa airport over it, not to mention the tool I use to clean my smoking pipe.

Seems a silly idea to me thinking risk to cost analysis.

Jonesfam

[BradC]

thinking

There's your mistake right there.

[JDNSW]

I believe it applies to all flights with 20 or more seats - not specific to the airport, but rather the class of aircraft. I suspect there are not many scheduled services operating aircraft with less than 20 seats these days, although there will be some.

[DiscoMick]

I suppose the security people could fly in with passengers, but that's taking up seats.
Better to screen passengers from regional airports on arrrival at major airports, I think.
I mean, terrorists can be caught when checking in at major airports.
Are we really suggesting someone from Birdsville is going to try to hijack a plane to Brisbane?

[Pickles2]

I suppose the security people could fly in with passengers, but that's taking up seats.
Better to screen passengers from regional airports on arrrival at major airports, I think.
I mean, terrorists can be caught when checking in at major airports.
Are we really suggesting someone from Birdsville is going to try to hijack a plane to Brisbane?
Re your last line,...it's not a question of that (location/local flight) at all.
IMHO, if terrorists were to get on a plane at Birdsville, and then blow up the plane in flight or whatever, they will create just as much drama & fear as doing the same thing on a major airline flight, maybe more (fear), as travelers will be aware that this sort of stuff can happen anywhere.....as I believe it can,......and will.
Pickles.

[JDNSW]

Yes. But the risk for flights from small centres is very much less, even if simply because of the much smaller number of passengers. And this risk has to be balanced against the probability of losing the airline service altogether. For many of these towns it would also mean losing a lot of services supplied by FIFO medical specialists etc.

[DiscoMick]

Yes, it's a trade off. I expect rural residents would put a high priority on keeping a regular airline service and would regard the risk from terrorists as very low.

[Bigbjorn]

I am reminded of the time (many years ago we had to get a mechanic to Mt Isa to fix some machinery. Couldn't drive because the roads were cut (wet season), and he had to cool his heels in Townsville for several days, the flights to Mt Isa being booked out. When he finally got on the Friendship he realised why - he was one of six passengers; all the other seats were occupied by nine gallon kegs, strapped in.

I'm not sure they'd get away with that these days!

I remember flying home to Winton in a DC3 when I was at boarding school. The aisle and under the seats were packed with mail bags, groceries, etc. This flight was a real milk run servicing several centres. Up and down like the David Jones lift.

[Arapiles]

I remember flying home to Winton in a DC3 when I was at boarding school. The aisle and under the seats were packed with mail bags, groceries, etc. This flight was a real milk run servicing several centres. Up and down like the David Jones lift.

I was flying in PNG a couple of years ago and when they closed the doors I could stlll see daylight - the rubber seals around the door were gone and hadn't been replaced .....

[Gumnut]

I was flying in PNG a couple of years ago and when they closed the doors I could stlll see daylight - the rubber seals around the door were gone and hadn't been replaced .....

I was in the Solomons earlier this year in the back of a Twin Otter - I think anything smaller than a machete was ok if it was in carry on... Then, it started to rain - and we all got wet, even the crew!!

[p38arover]

ANTI TERRORIST AND SECURITY RULES ARE BECOMING COMPLETELY REDICULOUS.......

Possibly even ridiculous. [bigwhistle]

[DiscoMick]

Just make sure you pack the small toothpaste tube and not the big one or you may be suspected of being a terrorist.