I wonder if many of these small airports actually have the absurdly long wait times that the bigger airports do. In my experience with the small airport I live near, getting through security is...
I wonder if many of these small airports actually have the absurdly long wait times that the bigger airports do. In my experience with the small airport I live near, getting through security is pretty painless and quick (15-20 minutes, sometimes faster). That's not really enough of a time sink that I can feel good about getting on a plane with no security check.
TSA is 75% security theater and 25% a jobs program (especially for veterans). It should be abolished and it's 7 billion dollar annual budget should be put towards something that's actually useful.
TSA is 75% security theater and 25% a jobs program (especially for veterans). It should be abolished and it's 7 billion dollar annual budget should be put towards something that's actually useful.
I use to fly from a pretty small airport, and the security always felt more intense. I think it's because they just had the time to go through everything more. I'm not sure if they're talking...
I use to fly from a pretty small airport, and the security always felt more intense. I think it's because they just had the time to go through everything more.
That's not really enough of a time sink that I can feel good about getting on a plane with no security check.
I'm not sure if they're talking about no security checks completely or just greatly reduced. However, I've never really felt unsafe flying before all the extra security was implemented.
Edit: just noticed my terrible wording and general lack of info, so clarifying that the plan was to remove TSA security checks or reduce them. Airport's private security will still be in place.
I've flown through CHS a bunch (which, with a whopping 15 gates, might be a bit too big for this?), and in my experience there's a similar range in wait times to many larger airports, maybe even a...
I've flown through CHS a bunch (which, with a whopping 15 gates, might be a bit too big for this?), and in my experience there's a similar range in wait times to many larger airports, maybe even a bit towards the longer end.
You'll probably pay more because it's a regional flight, and now you'll just have to sit in a TSA line at a larger airport. The article didn't say how they'd handle checked bags, or even if they...
You'll probably pay more because it's a regional flight, and now you'll just have to sit in a TSA line at a larger airport.
It would see passengers who travel through small and medium-sized airports on aircraft with capacity for up to 60 people screened when they make connecting flights at larger facilities.
The article didn't say how they'd handle checked bags, or even if they would allow checked bags on these flights since those would be unscreened.
How confident are we that "cut screening" means eliminate all screening, altogether? When I first saw this I assumed it meant reverting to the "keep your jackets & shoes on, keep your electronics...
How confident are we that "cut screening" means eliminate all screening, altogether? When I first saw this I assumed it meant reverting to the "keep your jackets & shoes on, keep your electronics & liquids in your bags, put your bags on the conveyor belt and walk through the metal detector" routine that they've started doing randomly on occasion, but all the commentors that are quoted seem to be reading it as the former.
I think the confusion is due to the language used in this article. (I probably should have posted a different one, but I thought this was the easiest to digest). From TSA studies eliminating...
I think the confusion is due to the language used in this article. (I probably should have posted a different one, but I thought this was the easiest to digest).
The idea that has been studied since at least 2011 is appealing because dropping the federal staffing at airports with planes that seat 60 passengers or fewer would save $115 million per year. The airports serve about 10,000 passengers per day and require nearly 1,300 TSA workers. Those workers could be shifted to larger airports among the 440 locations where TSA now screens passengers.
TSA already allows 22 airports nationwide to hire private security, so long as they meet federal security standards. Many are small airports, such as several in Wyoming, where local officials say private screening allows greater flexibility in staffing. But the largest include San Francisco International Airport, Kansas City International Airport and Orlando Sanford International Airport, the smaller of the two Orlando-area airports.
Note that this doesn't mean you won't have to go through TSA, it just delays it until you get to a larger airport. The article doesn't mention how checked bags would be handled. It also doesn't...
Note that this doesn't mean you won't have to go through TSA, it just delays it until you get to a larger airport.
It would see passengers who travel through small and medium-sized airports on aircraft with capacity for up to 60 people screened when they make connecting flights at larger facilities.
The article doesn't mention how checked bags would be handled. It also doesn't say if airports with a mix of <60 and >=60 passenger aircraft would have TSA for all or just the >=60 capacity plane passengers (though I'd expect the latter).
Schiavo went on to say that ending security screening at smaller airports would make people afraid to fly out of them — and sap those facilities of air service.
I think this will hurt regional airports, but it's not because of the lack of security. Regional flights (in my experience) are more expensive than going to a larger airport, and if I have to ensure my layover between flights is enough for a much larger TSA line, I'll be more inclined to skip the regional airport.
I read it as only for connections. And honestly the articles don't give enough info on this, but I working under the assumption that the larger airports (now with additional staff), will not...
Note that this doesn't mean you won't have to go through TSA, it just delays it until you get to a larger airport.
I read it as only for connections. And honestly the articles don't give enough info on this, but I working under the assumption that the larger airports (now with additional staff), will not greatly increase in time with their checks.
As for checked baggage, I assume they will still have to be screen, just not by the TSA.
I used to fly through a tiny airport (5 gates) frequently. Security was there but it was so quick. I only remember having to wait in a line once. More often than not I would also know one of the...
I used to fly through a tiny airport (5 gates) frequently. Security was there but it was so quick. I only remember having to wait in a line once. More often than not I would also know one of the security agents (small town).
Am I the only one that might choose one of these airports so I can get through the gate faster?
I wonder if many of these small airports actually have the absurdly long wait times that the bigger airports do. In my experience with the small airport I live near, getting through security is pretty painless and quick (15-20 minutes, sometimes faster). That's not really enough of a time sink that I can feel good about getting on a plane with no security check.
Is the feeling better or worse considering that the TSA isn’t even good at security?
TSA is 75% security theater and 25% a jobs program (especially for veterans). It should be abolished and it's 7 billion dollar annual budget should be put towards something that's actually useful.
Heaven forbid we take away the people's tiger-repellant rocks.
But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
I use to fly from a pretty small airport, and the security always felt more intense. I think it's because they just had the time to go through everything more.
I'm not sure if they're talking about no security checks completely or just greatly reduced. However, I've never really felt unsafe flying before all the extra security was implemented.
Edit: just noticed my terrible wording and general lack of info, so clarifying that the plan was to remove TSA security checks or reduce them. Airport's private security will still be in place.
I've flown through CHS a bunch (which, with a whopping 15 gates, might be a bit too big for this?), and in my experience there's a similar range in wait times to many larger airports, maybe even a bit towards the longer end.
You'll probably pay more because it's a regional flight, and now you'll just have to sit in a TSA line at a larger airport.
The article didn't say how they'd handle checked bags, or even if they would allow checked bags on these flights since those would be unscreened.
How confident are we that "cut screening" means eliminate all screening, altogether? When I first saw this I assumed it meant reverting to the "keep your jackets & shoes on, keep your electronics & liquids in your bags, put your bags on the conveyor belt and walk through the metal detector" routine that they've started doing randomly on occasion, but all the commentors that are quoted seem to be reading it as the former.
I think the confusion is due to the language used in this article. (I probably should have posted a different one, but I thought this was the easiest to digest).
From TSA studies eliminating checkpoints at smaller airports, but criticism is fierce:
Note that this doesn't mean you won't have to go through TSA, it just delays it until you get to a larger airport.
The article doesn't mention how checked bags would be handled. It also doesn't say if airports with a mix of <60 and >=60 passenger aircraft would have TSA for all or just the >=60 capacity plane passengers (though I'd expect the latter).
I think this will hurt regional airports, but it's not because of the lack of security. Regional flights (in my experience) are more expensive than going to a larger airport, and if I have to ensure my layover between flights is enough for a much larger TSA line, I'll be more inclined to skip the regional airport.
I read it as only for connections. And honestly the articles don't give enough info on this, but I working under the assumption that the larger airports (now with additional staff), will not greatly increase in time with their checks.
As for checked baggage, I assume they will still have to be screen, just not by the TSA.
I used to fly through a tiny airport (5 gates) frequently. Security was there but it was so quick. I only remember having to wait in a line once. More often than not I would also know one of the security agents (small town).