PhillyKev 0 #26 September 12, 2002 QuoteI'm quite confident that I've rationally explored all the expected reactions of people who may see the letter. What about this : QuoteSecurity personnel who come across skydiving gear treat the equipment differently. Some are aware of what the gear is, and some are not. Response: We want to stay safe but not inconvenience the majority of passengers. For that reason we'll require that they always be checked as luggage to avoid any confusion or inconsistencies and reduce the workload for our screeners. QuoteParachute rigs should be inspected and scrutinized like any other suspect item that passes through security checkpoints. Response: Yeah, we really should scrutinize those parachutes! But until we form a committee to discuss exactly what that scrutiny should entail we'll just ban them from carry on. Not trying to bust your balls, but the USPA is there to represent us. You may think you've thought of every possible response to your letter, but quite possibly they've actually witnessed a negative response that you haven't thought of. It's nice what you're trying to do, but it could inadvertantly have a negative impact on all of us (however unlikely that is). Also, as you've stated yourself, there have been parachutes in cabins all this time, and I personally haven't heard of more than 1 or 2 problems that people had. If there's no problem, why stir the pot? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #27 September 12, 2002 One more point: USPA Helps Jet Blue Accept Carry-Ons (09/05) Following up on a member complaint, USPA corresponds with discount airline JetBlue about their policy for parachutes as carry-ons. A JetBlue executive replies that parachutes meet the airline's and TSA's guidelines for allowable carry-ons. Read the correspondence between USPA and JetBlue here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christoofar 0 #28 September 12, 2002 Good points. I understand your concern. I'm not an idealogue who is going to "March on Washington" about this, either. This correspondence on JetBlue is dated fairly recently and cites TSA. That's further evidence that the issue has been discussed and decided on already. But this is skirting around the real issue here... application of TSA's policy across all the U.S. airports. Screeners are reacting differently when presented with this situation, as if they did not have the proper training. If one single screener insited that, say, your cat be inspected for contagious disease before being carried onboard because he saw a piece on DateLine... that would indicate inconsistent application of security policy and would be of interest to TSA management. That's my point, really. --- Maybe instead of the letter... we should identify which airports are hardest to get in and out of with plain old statistics? I can quickly whip together an airport security incident website to collect information and regurgitate back; then people could draw their own conclusions. This topic comes up very often on DZ.com It would be nice to see it resolved. ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #29 September 12, 2002 How many airports have actually been using federal screeners, though? I know Philly Int'l just went to federal screeners a couple days ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #30 September 12, 2002 QuoteQuoteFriend yuo must have two big brass church bells swinging low Wow Narci! I guess your secret's out now! You wouldn't believe how those brass bells affect my flying. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christoofar 0 #31 September 12, 2002 QuoteHow many airports have actually been using federal screeners, though? I know Philly Int'l just went to federal screeners a couple days ago. No clue here. Anyone? ____________________________________________________________ I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamsville 0 #32 September 12, 2002 All I'd add is: 1) AAD activates also in reponse to travel at a minimum speed (I believe 78mph) through a specified altitude (does that mean it wouldn't fire on a wingsuit jump?). While they could check this for themselves, mentioning it in the letter may leave them with more peace about the device if they imagine it to be accidentally not turned off. 2) I'd leave them with "Sincerely", rather than "Very truly yours". That may be a more appropriate level of familiarity. HarryI don't drink during the day, so I don't know what it is about this airline. I keep falling out the door of the plane. Harry, FB #4143 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamsville 0 #33 September 12, 2002 That might be Ed Scott. He is the FAA liason at USPA and may also be the TSA contact. I drove him to O'Hare after the USPA meeting in July and found him to be pretty reasonable and informed. HarryI don't drink during the day, so I don't know what it is about this airline. I keep falling out the door of the plane. Harry, FB #4143 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
