Security lines at the airport

[elleluv]

It is at Hartsfield Jackson, and that is truly the only airport I have security delays with. Not to be so cruel, but I really hate the Atlanta airport...worst design, etc. I lived in Orlando for 10 years and loved the easy layout. Heck, even LaGuardia (the airport I mainly travel to) is so much easier to navigate.

 

 

I've got it too.. and I do love it... but you need to be aware that you aren't guaranteed to clear. If you don't clear, you need to go through the normal screening process with everyone else. I still allow the same amount of time at the airport and when I clear (which is more often than not), just spend more time in the Club.

[frugaltravel]

I've got it too.. and I do love it... but you need to be aware that you aren't guaranteed to clear. If you don't clear, you need to go through the normal screening process with everyone else. I still allow the same amount of time at the airport and when I clear (which is more often than not), just spend more time in the Club.

 

When you don't clear the Pre Check, you still are at the front of the normal security line. So it can still be much quicker in airports like Atlanta.

[klfrodo]

Actually, they should be privatized.

 

Then we'd be back to pre 9/11.

Then everyone wanted the Gov't to take over.

 

We got what we asked for. :eek:

Then we wanted the Gov't to regulate airlines and waiting times on tarmac.

We got what we asked for.:eek:

Now, people want the Gov't to get into the cruiselines business :eek:

 

I wish people would stop asking,,, it never gets better

[aurelius180]

That's the whole problem with the sequester, it cuts everything, no matter how it's funded, or if it pays for itself, or actually saves money. Everything gets cut the same.

 

 

Except for Joey B's slush fund.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297650/Joe-Bidens-hotel-night-Paris-whopping-585-000.html

[jagoffee]

When you don't clear the Pre Check, you still are at the front of the normal security line. So it can still be much quicker in airports like Atlanta.

 

That is not how it works in Chicago in the line I use. They decide at the first check point.

[time4u2go]

...

Then we wanted the Gov't to regulate airlines and waiting times on tarmac.

We got what we asked for.:eek:

...

 

Yes we did! There are far fewer long waits on the tarmac than before.

[Ms Understood]

No unusual lines at either LAX or JFK last weekend. I used the Pre check at LAX but my sister went thru the regular line. I only beat her by about 10 minutes.

----------------------

Helen

[Eng23]

Then we'd be back to pre 9/11.

Then everyone wanted the Gov't to take over.

 

We got what we asked for. :eek:

Then we wanted the Gov't to regulate airlines and waiting times on tarmac.

We got what we asked for.:eek:

Now, people want the Gov't to get into the cruiselines business :eek:

 

I wish people would stop asking,,, it never gets better

Pre 9/11 security was the responsibility of the airlines whom contracted that responsibility to other private companies. They failed badly. Unfortunately the response to this failure was the creation of the TSA by the government. TSA hasn't been a complete success but we also have not had a serious terrorist event with flying since 9/11.

[frugaltravel]

Yes we did! There are far fewer long waits on the tarmac than before.

 

I totally agree with you. Quite a few regular posters on this forum forecasted doomsday once this law came into effect. Full flights, flights being canceled vs. the airline receiving a fine, no room to reaccommodate the stranded passengers, waiting for days on end for another flight. Fortunately none of that materialized. The airlines found a way to deal with the problem. Generally I am not one to side with the "more government" argument. But the airlines proved time and again that they could not regulate themselves. Only after that ineptness did the government (rightly so) step in.

[cruising cockroach]

Pre 9/11 security was the responsibility of the airlines whom contracted that responsibility to other private companies. They failed badly.

 

In a way, no. Boxcutter knives among other things were perfectly legal as carryons before then. Al Qaeda found a loophole and exploited it. I am still waiting for the implant or rectum bomber to show up. :D

 

What was a concern (not debating whether it was a valid/legitimate concern or not) were the security workforce who were often (legal) immigrants. Working for TSA requires U.S. citizenship.

[jagoffee]

I totally agree with you. Quite a few regular posters on this forum forecasted doomsday once this law came into effect. Full flights, flights being canceled vs. the airline receiving a fine, no room to reaccommodate the stranded passengers, waiting for days on end for another flight. Fortunately none of that materialized. The airlines found a way to deal with the problem. Generally I am not one to side with the "more government" argument. But the airlines proved time and again that they could not regulate themselves. Only after that ineptness did the government (rightly so) step in.

Yes, I would imagine there are fewer long waits.

I am not sure that your statement that none of that materialized is true.

Have you seen any statistics on cancelled flights? It seemed to be that there have been a significant increase in cancelled flights, but I have not seen any actual data. I would be very surprised if cancelled flights have not increases significantly. I have seen many flights being cancelled before the bad weather actually arrives and even cases where flights are cancelled and the storm never comes.

Also, flights sure seem to be more full to me.

 

I am not suggesting that some regulation was not necessary, but it has a downside. I believe the new regulation would have been more appropriate if the passenger received the compensation and not the government.

[time4u2go]

Yes, I would imagine there are fewer long waits.

I am not sure that your statement that none of that materialized is true.

Have you seen any statistics on cancelled flights? It seemed to be that there have been a significant increase in cancelled flights, but I have not seen any actual data. I would be very surprised if cancelled flights have not increases significantly. I have seen many flights being cancelled before the bad weather actually arrives and even cases where flights are cancelled and the storm never comes.

Also, flights sure seem to be more full to me.

 

I am not suggesting that some regulation was not necessary, but it has a downside. I believe the new regulation would have been more appropriate if the passenger received the compensation and not the government.

 

There have not been more cancellations since the law went into effect. The law went into effect in April of 2010. Here's the amount of cancellations as a percentage of total flights for each year since 2004:

 

2004: 3.02%

2005: 4.22%

2006: 1.68%

2007: 2.54%

2008: 2.86%

2009: 2.33%

2010: 2.46% (law went into effect in April of 2010)

2011: 3.87%

2012: 1.46%

2013: 1.48%

 

Source: http://www.transtats.bts.gov/HomeDrillChart.asp

[jagoffee]

There have not been more cancellations since the law went into effect. The law went into effect in April of 2010. Here's the amount of cancellations as a percentage of total flights for each year since 2004:

 

2004: 3.02%

2005: 4.22%

2006: 1.68%

2007: 2.54%

2008: 2.86%

2009: 2.33%

2010: 2.46% (law went into effect in April of 2010)

2011: 3.87%

2012: 1.46%

2013: 1.48%

 

Source: http://www.transtats.bts.gov/HomeDrillChart.asp

 

Thanks. Hard to argue with facts. Interesting that except for this year the delayed flights have also dropped.

 

No doubt that the cancellations have not increased.

[88ren767]

Thanks. Hard to argue with facts. Interesting that except for this year the delayed flights have also dropped.

 

No doubt that the cancellations have not increased.

 

Another cause of lower cancellations and delays is the year over year drop in domestic airline capacity since 2007 or so (about 2% drop per year). Busier airports, particularly the 3 in NYC and also ORD that are responsible for most originating and downline delays in the nation have seen significant drops in scheduled operations.

[kenish]

Another cause of lower cancellations and delays is the year over year drop in domestic airline capacity since 2007 or so (about 2% drop per year). Busier airports, particularly the 3 in NYC and also ORD that are responsible for most originating and downline delays in the nation have seen significant drops in scheduled operations.

 

Actually your figures are on the conservative side. I believe domestic airline capacity (seats) is down about 20% since 2007, which is closer to 4% per year over the 6 years.

 

Also, the total number of domestic flights has dropped even more than capacity has. Planes removed from service were biased towards smaller planes with fewer seats. Fewer planes circulating through the system reduces congestion, delays, and cancellations for the remaining flights.

 

Just my speculation, but the slight rise in 2010 followed by a big increase in 2011 may be due to the very severe and prolonged winter. OTOH, 2011-2012 winter was unusually mild. In any case, thanks time4u2go for posting the data.

[sandij]

I just flew to North Carolina from Ft Lauderdale through Atlanta, no problem except Atlanta likes to change the gate after you sat there for 20 minutes. All the security lines moved normally. I have heard that Miami is a mess getting through customs. I fly to Rome in a couple weeks and back through Philadelpia, a little concerned I only have three hours to do all the stuff you have to do to get back in the country. Crossing my fingers.

[waterbug123]

I just flew to North Carolina from Ft Lauderdale through Atlanta, no problem except Atlanta likes to change the gate after you sat there for 20 minutes.

 

Gate changes occur at virtually all airports, for a variety of understandable reasons.