Airport security breaches on and after 9/11 have led to the continual advancement of technologies such as millimeter wave imaging and backscatter scanners to prevent future tragedies
Metal-detecting scans of all airline passengers became mandatory in the U.S. at the start of 1973. Nearly all conventional airport metal detectors work by generating many magnetic pulses per second—a metal object passing through a metal detector influences how these pulses collapse....[More]
METAL DETECTORS:
Metal-detecting scans of all airline passengers became mandatory in the U.S. at the start of 1973. Nearly all conventional airport metal detectors work by generating many magnetic pulses per second—a metal object passing through a metal detector influences how these pulses collapse.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Transportation Security Administration
BOMB-SNIFFING DOGS:
Moments after a flight bound for Los Angeles took off from John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City on March 9, 1972, the airline was notified that there was a bomb on board and the aircraft returned to JFK....[More]
BOMB-SNIFFING DOGS:
Moments after a flight bound for Los Angeles took off from John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City on March 9, 1972, the airline was notified that there was a bomb on board and the aircraft returned to JFK. A bomb-sniffing dog found the explosive 12 minutes before it was set to detonate. The Federal Aviation Administration created the Explosives Detection Canine Team Program thereafter so any aircraft receiving a bomb threat could quickly divert to an airport with a canine team. Bomb-sniffing dogs still play a key role in detecting explosives and deterring terrorists.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
TSA
PUFFER PORTALS:
Explosive trace portals, often known as "puffers," blow gusts of air at those within to analyze particles shaken loose for any signs of explosives....[More]
PUFFER PORTALS:
Explosive trace portals, often known as "puffers," blow gusts of air at those within to analyze particles shaken loose for any signs of explosives. These were first deployed to U.S. airports in 2004, with a peak of 94 portals in 37 airports. However, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) said frequent maintenance issues caused by the dirt and humidity common to most airports led it to begin phasing out puffers in 2008.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Smiths Detection
MILLIMETER-WAVE SCANNERS:
Millimeter-wave technology bounces millimeter-wavelength radio waves off the body to generate 3-D images. The TSA recently began installing new software on its millimeter-wave scanners to eliminate passenger-specific images....[More]
MILLIMETER-WAVE SCANNERS:
Millimeter-wave technology bounces millimeter-wavelength radio waves off the body to generate 3-D images. The TSA recently began installing new software on its millimeter-wave scanners to eliminate passenger-specific images. The software instead displays the location of potential threat items on a generic outline of a person.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
TSA
BACKSCATTER X-RAYS:
Backscatter scanners beam low-level x-rays over a person's body, producing an image that resembles a chalk etching. The TSA is planning to test new software for backscatter scanners that eliminates passenger-specific images, instead displaying the location of potential threat items on a generic outline of a person....[More]
BACKSCATTER X-RAYS:
Backscatter scanners beam low-level x-rays over a person's body, producing an image that resembles a chalk etching. The TSA is planning to test new software for backscatter scanners that eliminates passenger-specific images, instead displaying the location of potential threat items on a generic outline of a person.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Rapiscan Systems
BAGGAGE X-RAYS:
A midair explosion by a suicide bomber that killed all 34 people on board a National Airlines plane in 1960 sparked demands in the U.S. for baggage inspection devices....[More]
BAGGAGE X-RAYS:
A midair explosion by a suicide bomber that killed all 34 people on board a National Airlines plane in 1960 sparked demands in the U.S. for baggage inspection devices. These x-ray machines have advanced by now to work like medical CT scanners, with sophisticated image-processing software to automatically screen checked baggage for explosives.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Morpho
TERAHERTZ SCANNERS:
Scanners that rely on terahertz rays—which lie between microwaves and infrared radiation on the electromagnetic spectrum—may be the future of passenger screening....[More]
TERAHERTZ SCANNERS:
Scanners that rely on terahertz rays—which lie between microwaves and infrared radiation on the electromagnetic spectrum—may be the future of passenger screening. They can penetrate common materials but do not seem to harm living tissue, and can identify compounds, such as hair gel or explosives. Such technology is now being tested at airports worldwide.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
ThruVision Systems
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
"The 9/11 attacks, the deadliest terrorist acts on U.S. soil, were the first to use airliners as weapons. More attempts followed, including Richard Reid's attempt in December 2001 to ignite explosives in his shoes on a flight from Paris to Miami, and at least 10 airliners were targets in a plot involving liquid explosives in 2006, forcing new policies regarding shoes at screening and liquids on airplanes. Then, on Christmas Day in 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to detonate explosives in his underwear on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit."
No, those other attempts were not meant to use the airplane as a weapon. It's a subtle but very important difference. Those others were meant to blow up the plane using explosives as the weapon. The bombs were the weapons, not the plane. It's an important distinction because those bombs could have been effectively deployed in a crowded mall, on a bus, train, etc. A bomb on a plane does not make the plane an effective weapon. Because you could as easily fake that there is a bomb. And again, using an actual bomb just blows up the plane and kills the people inside, like blowing up a bomb on a bus would do.
Terahertz? I encountered one unit that claimed gigahertz. Refused to go through it because there was no guarantee that it would not interfere with an internal cardiac device. Strongly suspect that such wave lenghts would in fact be very dangerous to the leads and prehaps the unit itself. Chances that the scanner has been adequately tested against such risks? Near zero given the cavalier attitudes by manufacturers and the blanket protection from negilence they have been granted. Will stick with purely manual procedures, thank you. Much more afraid of bad technology than near non-existant threat of terrorists but the military/industrial/mercenary/intelligence community lives to create the very risks they claim to prevent.
Of course, if you eliminated air travel altogether that would ensure perfect safety. I think it's time to think in terms of a cost-benefit ratio, in the same sense of whether or not it would be a good idea to install sprinkler systems in every home in the USA or whether all pedestrians should have to wear helmets. Both of these "precautions" would save some lives, but at a cost that exceeds the benefits by any reasonable measurement. Almost everyone would regard them as a ridiculous waste and that these funds could save more lives elsewhere. The enormous expense involved in screening air travelers at the extraordinary level we now practice exceeds the objective cost of several hijackings a year. A more modest program would free billions of dollars to be spent on preventing deaths elsewhere, as in early diagnosis and treatment of many cancers, better roads, safer cars, improving policing in high-crime areas, arresting undocumented drivers, deporting illegal immigrants while freeing up more jobs for Americans and countless other ways. The cost of obsessive ultra-effective air security is costing thousands of lives elsewhere. Why is a life lost in a hospital bed or on our nation’s streets or highways less important than one taken in a plane crash? America is infected with the idea that preventing a single act of terror is worth almost any price. This is an irrational response that ignores a myriad of other issues, including how 911 occurred in the first place.It's time to wake up and ask the right questions and spend our safety money where it counts.
Actually, the terrorists have already won the War in America. We are afraid of our shadows. We have terror- range alerts bombard us daily. We cannot take mouthwash on a plane for fear it will somehow take over the plane. The Police (special sections of them) can ignore ever right a citizen has and throw them in lockup till Sol goes Nova - their proof? They don't like the way you did your hair this morning. I've heard people say they were going to cancel their already-planned mall-shopping trip because their was a high-terror-threat flag flying today.
By handicapping and strapping our nation, by making travel tedious at best...what is all this new scanner te4chnology doing to my body? Like Fluoroscopes and xrays of another era, how much long-term damage is resulting from this? (Ever noticed the correlation between young men with a 2-minute acne zap in the 50s vs mature men with throat and mouth cancer (my! isn't that where acne shows up?!?) epidemic due to 'their tobacco use' (another scam if you've ever actually looked objectively at the experiments used to determine hazard...try it.)
By taking away our sense of safety, our belief we can go where we want, when we want, with minimal hazard (and you notice all this tech IS NOT stopping the problem items from reaching the planes?) the terrorists have already won.
New screening techniques, there are now advanced video systems that monitor airport perimeters and doors used by employees to enter secure areas. It uses a computer to pick up on anomalies recorded by video cameras and alerts the humans monitoring the system. There for airport Screening technologies made us safer. http://www.techiecop.com
It is a mystery to me how has induced mass hysteria gone to such lengths. The remedy of aggressive and constant screening is a lot worse than the threat we are told they want to prevent. It should be no surprise or hidden truth that the security business is a fabulous business, probably moving as much money as drugs. And it is no secret who are getting rich through it. The difference here is that the money comes from our taxes.
The article is a splendid instance of availability bias. It proudly lists all the successes, but fails to list the costs. They range from the banal - time lost by everyone, staff that could do better things - to the deeply social: building a society around mistrust and fear. In order to do so a new round of "self-domestication" (BOEHM) has been initiated. Working in the background, unverified computer programs establish "good-citizenship ratings", ready to ensnare the citizen into a web of probabilities.
Handicaps in CAPPS
World-Changing Ideas
Is High-Tech Security at Public Events Counterproductive?
The Drone Threat to National Security
The Hacker in Your Hardware: The Next Security Threat
U.S. Glossed Over Cancer Concerns Associated with Airport X-Ray Scanners
14 Comments
Add Comment"The 9/11 attacks, the deadliest terrorist acts on U.S. soil, were the first to use airliners as weapons. More attempts followed, including Richard Reid's attempt in December 2001 to ignite explosives in his shoes on a flight from Paris to Miami, and at least 10 airliners were targets in a plot involving liquid explosives in 2006, forcing new policies regarding shoes at screening and liquids on airplanes. Then, on Christmas Day in 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to detonate explosives in his underwear on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo, those other attempts were not meant to use the airplane as a weapon. It's a subtle but very important difference. Those others were meant to blow up the plane using explosives as the weapon. The bombs were the weapons, not the plane. It's an important distinction because those bombs could have been effectively deployed in a crowded mall, on a bus, train, etc. A bomb on a plane does not make the plane an effective weapon. Because you could as easily fake that there is a bomb. And again, using an actual bomb just blows up the plane and kills the people inside, like blowing up a bomb on a bus would do.
Terahertz? I encountered one unit that claimed gigahertz. Refused to go through it because there was no guarantee that it would not interfere with an internal cardiac device. Strongly suspect that such wave lenghts would in fact be very dangerous to the leads and prehaps the unit itself. Chances that the scanner has been adequately tested against such risks? Near zero given the cavalier attitudes by manufacturers and the blanket protection from negilence they have been granted. Will stick with purely manual procedures, thank you. Much more afraid of bad technology than near non-existant threat of terrorists but the military/industrial/mercenary/intelligence community lives to create the very risks they claim to prevent.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course, if you eliminated air travel altogether that would ensure perfect safety. I think it's time to think in terms of a cost-benefit ratio, in the same sense of whether or not it would be a good idea to install sprinkler systems in every home in the USA or whether all pedestrians should have to wear helmets. Both of these "precautions" would save some lives, but at a cost that exceeds the benefits by any reasonable measurement. Almost everyone would regard them as a ridiculous waste and that these funds could save more lives elsewhere. The enormous expense involved in screening air travelers at the extraordinary level we now practice exceeds the objective cost of several hijackings a year. A more modest program would free billions of dollars to be spent on preventing deaths elsewhere, as in early diagnosis and treatment of many cancers, better roads, safer cars, improving policing in high-crime areas, arresting undocumented drivers, deporting illegal immigrants while freeing up more jobs for Americans and countless other ways. The cost of obsessive ultra-effective air security is costing thousands of lives elsewhere. Why is a life lost in a hospital bed or on our nation’s streets or highways less important than one taken in a plane crash? America is infected with the idea that preventing a single act of terror is worth almost any price. This is an irrational response that ignores a myriad of other issues, including how 911 occurred in the first place.It's time to wake up and ask the right questions and spend our safety money where it counts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, the terrorists have already won the War in America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe are afraid of our shadows. We have terror- range alerts bombard us daily.
We cannot take mouthwash on a plane for fear it will somehow take over the plane.
The Police (special sections of them) can ignore ever right a citizen has and throw them in lockup till Sol goes Nova - their proof? They don't like the way you did your hair this morning.
I've heard people say they were going to cancel their already-planned mall-shopping trip because their was a high-terror-threat flag flying today.
By handicapping and strapping our nation, by making travel tedious at best...what is all this new scanner te4chnology doing to my body? Like Fluoroscopes and xrays of another era, how much long-term damage is resulting from this? (Ever noticed the correlation between young men with a 2-minute acne zap in the 50s vs mature men with throat and mouth cancer (my! isn't that where acne shows up?!?) epidemic due to 'their tobacco use' (another scam if you've ever actually looked objectively at the experiments used to determine hazard...try it.)
By taking away our sense of safety, our belief we can go where we want, when we want, with minimal hazard (and you notice all this tech IS NOT stopping the problem items from reaching the planes?) the terrorists have already won.
New screening techniques, there are now advanced video systems that monitor airport perimeters and doors used by employees to enter secure areas. It uses a computer to pick up on anomalies recorded by video cameras and alerts the humans monitoring the system. There for airport Screening technologies made us safer. http://www.techiecop.com
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe whole airport security effort is a farce.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEliminate all of it.
It is a mystery to me how has induced mass hysteria gone to such lengths. The remedy of aggressive and constant screening is a lot worse than the threat we are told they want to prevent.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt should be no surprise or hidden truth that the security business is a fabulous business, probably moving as much money as drugs. And it is no secret who are getting rich through it. The difference here is that the money comes from our taxes.
The article is a splendid instance of availability bias. It proudly lists all the successes, but fails to list the costs. They range from the banal - time lost by everyone, staff that could do better things - to the deeply social: building a society around mistrust and fear. In order to do so a new round of "self-domestication" (BOEHM) has been initiated. Working in the background, unverified computer programs establish "good-citizenship ratings", ready to ensnare the citizen into a web of probabilities.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTerrorism and Islam are hand in hand.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is no such thing as a moderate Muslim !!
A Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim !
They are all born and bred on the Koran !
The biggest and probably fatal mistake we make. Is treating Muslims with values they despise!
OURS!
Their desire and main aim is an Islam only world without Infidels.
The only time Islam could be considered peaceful is when we are dead!
Mohammed's history shows him to be a psychopathic murderer who made his wealth by abducting people for ransom.
His legacy lives on.
There are 1.5 billion Muslims world wide.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this+- 10 % are Jihadists That = +- 150,000,000
Only fools and liars can call this a minority.
The rest of the Muslim community are strategic support.
After all. Who else would they support ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReally?
Get your head out of the sand.
Or, rather which one would you prefer to be killed by ?
Apart from stating the obvious. What do you suggest we should do ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen what planes would you prefer to fly on ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh ! of course ! YOU DON'T FLY!!! Do you ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this