|
Phanatic posted:Going through security loving infuriates me. Yup. I still remember the looks on people's faces when TSA made me clear my AR-15, in the loving ticket line at BOS.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
I was completely with you, right up to the point where you misspelled "Washington Natinals."
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 18:42
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Going through security loving infuriates me. This should amuse you then. Saw this in this month's cryptogram: 1. TSA screener finds two pipes in passenger's bags. 2. Screener determines that they're not a threat. 3. Screener confiscates them anyway, because of their "material and appearance." 4. Because they're not actually a threat, screener leaves them at the checkpoint. 5. Everyone forgets about them. 6. Six hours later, the next shift of TSA screeners notices the pipes and -- not being able to explain how they got there and, presumably, because of their "material and appearance" -- calls the police bomb squad to remove the pipes. 7. TSA does not evacuate the airport, or even close the checkpoint, because -- well, we don't know why. http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/30/us/new-york-bomb-scare/index.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
I dunno, I feel safe.    And then there's this guy  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/17/roy-egan-former-ohare-tsa_n_1099331.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Going through security loving infuriates me. Just going to quote this. TSA security theater is definitely in the top 5 stupidest things in America, and I'd say it's right up there in the top 3 stupidest post-9/11 overreactions the country had. That pipe story is pretty good, but I think we favorite is when they confiscated someone's...purse, I think? It was either a purse or a belt that had a semi-replica looking thing of a gun on it...like it was a hunk of metal vaguely in the shape of a gun, but a 5 year old could've told you that it was clearly not a firearm. TSA freaks out at the checkpoint and confiscates it anyway, because....? It's not like going through security is hard as long as you've done it a couple of times and aren't a blithering idiot, but jesus christ was a waste of time/money/effort that has yielded nothing but pointless incompetence. I chuckle and roll my eyes every time I get pulled aside for additional screening...given my job, if I really wanted to hurt the U.S. I wouldn't need to try and light my underwear on fire like some dumbass terrorist. But hey Mr. TSA, you keep doing your job and "randomly" screen people, it's not like the government already spent $10,000 and several months investigating me to make sure I wasn't a threat or anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
Tools greater than 7" length are prohibited. Which is why, apparently, they confiscated my tape measure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
So, if you are a fighter/bomber pilot, you paint a bomb or flag on your a/c for each mission/kill right? So stands to reason a tanker crew paints gas pumps on the side of their Victor! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
grover posted:Tools greater than 7" length are prohibited. Which is why, apparently, they confiscated my tape measure. That is loving amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
no liquids over 100ml. it is frozen sauce with meat. but when it melts it will be a liquid...... it is meat, in sauce. Probably less than 100ml of sauce. it is liquid. no, it is frozen. It is solid. this yogurt is too large to come through security. it is clearly under 100ml it doesn't say that so on the container. it is yogurt. Under 100ml of yogurt we have to confiscate it i will eat it. you cannot eat it, we have to confiscate it you cannot bring a camera through security i have a camera on my phone, so do you, so does everyone else yes but we can't stop people having their phones i can buy a camera at dixons duty free and then i will have a camera airside yes but... you cannot bring a camera through security ok i need it for work too late you already said you were flying later today I could go on and on and on and on... I work at an airport and go through this every day. Most days it is alright. The days it isn't make you want to claw your eyes out. edit: oh yeah I have a tool card so I can bring knives and poo poo through with impunity. But not yogurt. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Feb 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
Linedance posted:
Oh, I forgot one. Returning from India. I'm in the secure area of the Delhi airport. I buy a bottle of Cuban rum, duty-free. This is Delhi, not Yemen, they take their security pretty loving seriously there (although not as seriously as in Leh, where every goddamned person gets frisked by a large and swarthy and very serious individual). I land at Heathrow. You go through a security checkpoint *again*, even though you're already in the secure area. They, obviously, find my 750ml bottle of rum. Can't bring it through. Why? Because I didn't buy it at an EU airport. First, that's bullshit. My sister went through the same thing with a bottle of Limoncello she bought in the secure area duty-free store at the Rome airport, connecting through Frankfurt on the way home. Second, I know it's rum, you know it's rum, everybody in the goddamned world would accept that this is a bottle of rum and not liquid explosive death. You are, clearly and deliberately, *pretending* that there is some security risk, it is a mass consensual hallucination and it's intellectually every bit as offensive as if you were wearing a Gestapo uniform and fondling my junk. So I open the bottle and dump it out to deprive these assholes of a free bottle of the best rum on the planet. Walking to my gate, I pass a duty-free store. Oh, look at that, they have the exact same rum for sale. Airport security hasn't a single loving thing to do with security.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Politicians say "omg we need to show that we deal with the threat. make demands on the airport operators!" Airport operators go "omg we need to appease the politicians or we'll be in trouble. What's dangerous though? Let's hire security companies" Security companies go "omg I get to define the risks and what countermeasures to deploy AND how much to charge for it! I'm made for life!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:04
|
|
|
I will say that TSA helped me out once when I was flying out of Columbus. I was on the last flight out on a RJ, and was running late from a customer site. One of the agents actually went to the gate and reopened the jetway door while my stuff was on the xray belt. Actually all of my awesome customer service experiences have happened at that airport. You want to know pain? Try flying with skydiving gear some time...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
My brother had his nail clippers confiscated before a recent flight. After enduring the security dog-and-pony show, he stopped at the Chili's in the terminal to get a burger. When he was served his burger, they gave him a 5" knife in case he wanted to cut the burger in half. I guess Chili's hates America.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
Ola posted:Politicians say "omg we need to show that we deal with the threat. make demands on the airport operators!" Government says "No you're not allowed to do that. You will use our Federal employees or we'll shut you down" http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-29/travel/tsa.private_1_tsa-government-screeners-screening-program?_s=PM:TRAVEL
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
e: ^^Really? The ones in Canada are private.Ola posted:Politicians say "omg we need to show that we deal with the threat. make demands on the airport operators!" The guy who writes the newsletter I got my little story from refers to this as "Security Theater." Instead of pursuing a good practice of security, he argues, the powers that be vastly prefer to create the appearance of strict security. This gives them better cover in case something bad happens. There's also those security companies who have a big incentive not to pursue effective security, but rather to dream up terror plots (of which there is essentially an infinite number) and then get money 'protecting' against them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
I got this tiger repellant here, guaranteed 100% effective... I'll sell it to you real cheap 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:22
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I got this tiger repellant here, guaranteed 100% effective... I'll sell it to you real cheap How much for the rock?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
Mobius1B7R posted:And all this talk about paying for tickets, I can fly for free. From the last page, but once I get certified on my first 2 sectors I can take advantage of familiarization flights. There's paperwork and you can't use use a fam flight in conjunction with vacation days, but it's still a free flight. You even get to chill in the cockpit. I'm definitely gonna be taking advantage of it as soon as I'm able.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:32
|
|
I don't fly often enough though, I really should just go on random daytrips just for the hell of it (I work for an airline).
|
Phanatic posted:Going through security isn't bad at all, but *having* to go through security, *having* to have my bags searched through or my person groped by the same organization of monkeys that rips out colostomy bags, can't tell an insulin pump from a bomb, and seriously has to pretend that grandmothers in wheelchairs and prosthetics are a threat, is definitely in the Top 5 Stupidest Things in America, it's right up there with the War on Drugs and the Washington Nationals. I agree with you. I think it's pretty drat stupid as well, but it's not something that pisses me off to the point of not flying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 01:05
|
|
|
Airport security theater is ridiculous but frankly I'm not willing to drive to register my moral opposition to security theater. I write a letter to my representatives complaining about it and go on my way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 04:12
|
|
|
I always thought it was hilarious on the way back from Iraq they would make us take our bolt carrier groups out of our rifles and put them in our pockets when using civilian airliners. This is funny not only because its just in my pocket but because it takes less than 5 second for me to get the bolt carrier group back into the rifle and maybe another two to rack a round into the chamber. Also they made the guys with the 249's put the safety on, sounds smart right? Well the weapon only goes on safe with the bolt back so the Soldier had to lock the bolt back, which is an integral part of prepping the weapon to fire. So they forced the operator to make the weapon closer to firing to make it "safe". Also I had my 6" fixed blade knife on me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:So I open the bottle and dump it out to deprive these assholes of a free bottle of the best rum on the planet. Bravo. I had a security screener in Guatemala confiscate a roll of gaffers tape from my camera bag, which I had flown with many times before. He didn't throw it in the garbage can like everything else they confiscated, he set it on top of the xray machine next to his cell phone so he could take it home with him. That poo poo's $15 a roll.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 07:57
|
|
|
I agree with the viewpoint that if the terrorists have made it to the airport, it's probably already too late. http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2011/12/tsa-insanity-201112 A good article on the futility of the TSA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 15:01
|
|
|
I kinda think that if the TSA or such bothers you that much, you probably should just mellow out a bit instead of raging. But maybe I've just moved on from getting angry at things you can't control and letting them ruin your trip.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
smackfu posted:I kinda think that if the TSA or such bothers you that much, you probably should just mellow out a bit instead of raging. But maybe I've just moved on from getting angry at things you can't control and letting them ruin your trip. This is the correct attitude of course. The last few times I've flown I've planned my trip around what liquid possessions can be bought at the destination and how to squeeze my necessary belongings into a practical carry-on backpack. Much better, but I still grumble.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 16:32
|
|
|
smackfu posted:I kinda think that if the TSA or such bothers you that much, you probably should just mellow out a bit instead of raging. But maybe I've just moved on from getting angry at things you can't control and letting them ruin your trip. It's not a matter of raging at it, it's a matter of not wanting to contribute to it. Same reason I don't buy Sony products: I want to minimize my financial contributions to their overreach.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 16:58
|
|
|
A little late on a few conversations, but as a logistics manager we're basically taught that anything over 500 miles justifies the price of an airplane. It's like the magic distance. As far as getting through TSA checkpoints, I also dress for the occasion, wearing shorts with no belt, flip flops, even have a TSA approved laptop case. All that won't prepare you for my last flight out of JFK for example, when the line delay to get through security was literally 1.5 hours due to a screening line shutting down. I had the same experience getting onto a civilian aircraft after redeploying from Iraq, managing to carry an Italian stiletto onto the aircraft along with my laughably "disassembled" M-16. However, in light of all this, it's important to remember that these TSA checkpoints are only one part of the "layers" of TSA security that Kip Hawley explained to Congress. Due to the nature of our military presence, it's easy to see how we might slip past the one layer, ignoring the fact that several other layers exist for foreign travelers. In my example, I forgot I had mine secured in the butt stock compartment of my weapon, typically reserved for a cleaning kit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 17:36
|
|
|
For federal travel, we're required to complete a travel cost comparison worksheet, where we compare the costs of various modes of travel, and then select the least expensive one. Over 8 hours of driving, hotel/per diem costs nearly always tip in favor of air travel. Below that, it depends almost entirely on how overpriced the flights are on whether it's cheaper to fly or drive. But considering even the shortest flight involves driving to the airport, paying for parking, at least 2 hours wasted in early arrival/layovers, and then renting a car and driving to your destination, driving wins out for virtually anything under 3-5 hours. Unfortunately, this policy completely ignores lost productivity and comptime as a factor, concentrating ONLY on direct travel costs, and we end up stuck on 2-hop flights that depart/arrive at inconvenient times instead of a direct flight that's $10 more expensive in ticket costs but gets us there 3 hours sooner and entirely during normal working hours, and for several hundred dollars cheaper with labor costs considered. Your tax dollars at work! grover fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Feb 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
grover posted:For federal travel, we're required to complete a travel cost comparison worksheet, where we compare the costs of various modes of travel, and then select the least expensive one. Over 8 hours of driving, and hotel/per diem costs nearly always tip in favor of air travel. Below that, it depends almost entirely on how overpriced the flights are on whether it's cheaper to fly or drive. Are you sure that's a requirement? They sure as poo poo don't do that at Tinker. A guy in my office had to go to some podunk place in the southwest. The travel office booked him a trip that had 2 or 3 connecting flights (something like 14 hours of flying/layovers) to land him in town where he'd get a rental car, when it would have been just over half the cost to fly into McCarran or whatever (I can't remember exactly, this was about a year ago) and get him a rental there to drive the 2 hours into town. Even when he printed off his plan with prices, it didn't matter. They spent about $2k unnecessarily.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:08
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Are you sure that's a requirement? They sure as poo poo don't do that at Tinker. Edit: JTR posted:Constructed travel is when a traveler chooses a mode of travel other than the standard or authorized mode. One example is when a traveler drives a privately owned conveyance (POC) or rental car instead of flying. When this occurs, the traveler may be required to provide a cost-comparison to the Authorizing Official (AO).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
grover posted:Unfortunately, this policy completely ignores lost productivity and comptime as a factor, concentrating ONLY on direct travel costs, and we end up stuck on 2-hop flights that depart/arrive at inconvenient times instead of a direct flight that's $10 more expensive in ticket costs but gets us there 3 hours sooner and entirely during normal working hours, and for several hundred dollars cheaper with labor costs considered. Your tax dollars at work! This happens in the private sector as well, and it always irritated me. I had to spend a year going back and forth from Memphis to Cleveland. It's a miserable 90 minute flight in a CRJ, but at least you're there. I frequently ran into the "$10 too expensive" trap for the direct flight, so I would have to connect through Detroit, Atlanta, Louisville, or Cincinnati. And suddenly it takes all day to get there or back home. Add in the potential for weather problems and those weird hours and connections can add in a hotel stay, extra meals, missing a meeting or conference call the next day...
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:41
|
|
|
Jesus this cattle car dreariness is killing the mood. There's no talk of toilet habits, ticket prices and seat comfort in the train thread. Let's take this poo poo to Wales and down in the weeds.  (note apple in co-pilot's hand)       
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 20:13
|
|
|
Isn't there one from the Mach Loop featuring the "I'm with stupid" sign?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 20:24
|
|
|
grover posted:For federal travel, we're required to complete a travel cost comparison worksheet, where we compare the costs of various modes of travel, and then select the least expensive one. I didn't have to do that at NAVSEA, but that was over a decade ago. quote:Unfortunately, this policy completely ignores lost productivity and comptime as a factor, concentrating ONLY on direct travel costs, and we end up stuck on 2-hop flights that depart/arrive at inconvenient times instead of a direct flight that's $10 more expensive in ticket costs but gets us there 3 hours sooner and entirely during normal working hours, and for several hundred dollars cheaper with labor costs considered. Your tax dollars at work! Yep. We bill you out at $200 an hour, so it's a brilliant idea to make you waste couple of hours doing legwork to save us $50 on an airline ticket. benito posted:This happens in the private sector as well, and it always irritated me. It's not as bad, though, at least for me. If you fail to pick the least expensive flight (or at least, a flight that's less expensive by some hidden $ threshold), our travel system wants you to justify why, but that's as simple as picking "Does not meet program or schedule requirements" from a drop-down menu in a web form. My tickets to India were $6500. Turns out that business-class international's gently caress-off expensive if you don't know you're taking the trip until a week before you leave. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Feb 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
Understeer posted:Isn't there one from the Mach Loop featuring the "I'm with stupid" sign? There sure is. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
grover posted:Unfortunately, this policy completely ignores lost productivity and comptime as a factor, concentrating ONLY on direct travel costs, and we end up stuck on 2-hop flights that depart/arrive at inconvenient times instead of a direct flight that's $10 more expensive in ticket costs but gets us there 3 hours sooner and entirely during normal working hours, and for several hundred dollars cheaper with labor costs considered. Your tax dollars at work! This is rather private sector too, if I take anything other than the lowest-cost option on a company preferred carrier for one of my clients I have to sign a waiver and explain Why I Did The Rules Violation and if I do enough Rules Violations someone comes to bother me about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:This is rather private sector too, if I take anything other than the lowest-cost option on a company preferred carrier for one of my clients I have to sign a waiver and explain Why I Did The Rules Violation and if I do enough Rules Violations someone comes to bother me about it. The website we have to use (CWT/Concur) has the rules encoded in, with leeway so we have some discretion (MIA-CLT-DFW was like $15 cheaper than MIA-DFW, which was within the threshold). DFW is awesome on Saturday nights; ten steps from the door to the TSA Pre-check line (still owns, had a nice chat with the TSA person since she was bored), AAdmiral's Club is empty, and AA gave me an upgrade too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 02:48
|
|
|
Let's just say "Ride in a jet" was on my bucket list, anyone have a recommendation? At one time I thought I found L-39 rides for ~$3,000 but looking for options in USA, preferably east of Mississippi.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 04:02
|
|
|
LockMart just announced two new versions of the C-130J: C-130XLJ, which is basically a stripper model that looks to aim for potential civilian sales SC-130J, to replace the P-3 Orion. I'm really interested in seeing how they plan to drop depth charges and sonar bouys from a palletized load.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 07:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:I'm really interested in seeing how they plan to drop depth charges and sonar bouys from a palletized load. Air-dropping a mini-sub.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 07:50
|
|
