Back to Squawk list
  • 30

New Programs Allow Non-Flyers Through Security, Wait at Gate

Submitted
A rule that has been in place since the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001 is slowly being relaxed across American airports. A new program being rolled out across American airports is allowing general members of the public to access the airside areas of American airport terminals. (aeroxplorer.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


NF2G
David Stark 19
People don't remember anything before 9/11, it seems. Access to airport gates was easy back then. Planewatchers and other non-flyers were not treated as potential threats to aviation.

BTW, the 9/11 terrorists all had tickets.
Zot22
Bab Bezat 4
I have to admit that I still have some photos of seeing my grandmother (Macedonia) onto her plane from the waiting area, with my 3 year-old son in her lap before departure. Now in his late 30s he still remembers that. This kind of program will be most helpful when family members can ease a flight-nervous family members worries. At any rate - I like the idea.
MLSellers
David, the 9-11 KILLERS were also, high level frequent flyer account holders and had high status with the air carriers.
People do no remember the late 60 into mid 70s when we didn't have metal detectors either and thousands of people were wt the airport to see one person off.........
Dpharrison
Dan Harrison 7
And no TSA.
darjr26
darjr26 2
I guess you don’t remember the 60’s and 70’s. There were over 150 hijackings, most of them to Cuba.
NF2G
David Stark 7
People don't remember anything before 9/11, it seems. Access to airport gates was easy back then. Planewatchers and other non-flyers were not treated as potential threats to aviation.
dnorthern
dnorthern 24
Just no. Security lines are long enough.
MikeMohle
Mike Mohle 22
And at gate areas there are NEVER enough seats. This just makes it worse.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 22
As if it wasn’t crowded enough now we have to put up with non flyers as well?
musephoto
Geoff Rowe 8
The only group of people this helps is people picking up small children flying alone. However there much be some procedures already in place for this because I remember picking up my grand kids at Ontario and they are definitely post 9/11!
Kensterfly
Ken Thompson 8
You always been able to deliver or meet an unaccompanied child at the gate, just by asking for a gate pass at the ticket counter.
cratermoon
Steven Newton 1
Just allowed to? I thought a parent or guardian was required to accompany to the gate for kids under 15
xtoler
Larry Toler 4
Back in '92 I was flying out of IAD for my new assignment at Ramstein. My flight was to Frankfurt. Because my parents live in VA they took me to the airport (I was returning from a consecutive overseas tour leave). They were allowed most of the way into C concourse, but weren't allowed into the international gate area. It was different back then. Still crowded but security going air side wasn't too bad.
OccamsRazor
Ben Bosley 7
When I was escorting my mother who has mobility issues for a flight I was very surprised to learn that I could go through the checkpoint with her. Had to produce a drivers license to the agent at the check in desk and go through security normally like any other passenger. I think the program should be limited to people that have a legitimate need though.
maliesmom
Robin Rosner 2
I believe that's known as a gate pass which I have gotten. Trouble brews everywhere. I like the access so I can visit the shops or get a snack. Not sure that's considered a legitimate need:-)
rmchambers
rmchambers 6
Should only be for unaccompanied minors, so their parents can get them to the gate and wait with them before handing them off to the flight attendant.
PegLegJim
Jim Welch 3
I agree that security levels are already stressed, especially with the understaffed TSA’s. It’s already hard to find a seat at gates all too often, & I don’t see that improving any time soon. There are a few reasons where this is already allowed (picking up a disabled flyer, etc.), but other than that, it will make it even mor chaotic. I remember the good ole’ days like many of you, but those days went out with the 25¢ loaf of bread.
GriffDub3
Pittsburgh Int’l Airport had the same thing called My PIT Pass program back in 2017
https://flypittsburgh.com/acaa-corporate/newsroom/news-releases/pit-is-first-in-country-to-allow-public-airside-access/
thundergob
Martin Allan 9
Why should non flyers need to pass that far into the airport? It's already crowded enough, surely they can say goodbyes earlier without potentially clogging the system resources.
OccamsRazor
Ben Bosley 10
Family members escorting children who are flying alone. Caretakers and family members escorting elderly/disabled individuals who are flying alone, etc. Plenty of legitimate reasons.
Kensterfly
Ken Thompson 0
Those special needs have always been easily met simply by requesting a gate psss at the ticket counter. Those are good reasons.
Doing it for social reasons should not be acceptable.
arfadaily
arfadaily -7
There really isn't ...
maliesmom
Robin Rosner 8
there really is for those of us who are caregivers to those who are elder or disabled. You are truly ignorant of reality if you can't realize the need.
srobak
srobak -2
You've been able to get a gate pass this whole time. Part that - non flyers don't need to be on there.
thegrump
thegrump 4
This is a good thing. With families scattered across thousands of miles, having a family member meet a traveler with mobility problems and help them through the often very long walk to baggage claim or transportation is the difference between them feeling confident enough to make a trip.

And come on, who doesn’t miss getting off an airplane and seeing a couple family members overcome with joy at seeing each other? Little things like that make air travel just a little more “human”.
srobak
srobak 7
We don't need this back. Security lines are already too long and there's no space at the gate and the terminals are already jammed. I remember wondering how we ever did it in the first place once it got restricted, because of how wall to wall the space was.

Keep non flyers out.. .
phleroy
Philippe Leroy 2
Do we really need more people to go through TSA checkpoints?
rdlink
rdlink 2
Or you could do what I would sometimes do to see my girlfriend off. I'd buy a full fare ticket for a flight 2-3 hours after hers and just cancel it once I was through security.
maliesmom
Robin Rosner 2
We managed with additonal people (and profits) before we can do it again. As the escort to two senior adult parents, one who is deaf and the other with dementia it was important I accompany them to the gate. Or meet them on return. Or meet my hearing impaired sibling
srobak
srobak 0
Then you can get a gate pass to help them like you've been able to do since 9/11. The airports weren't nearly as jammed before then as now. If you aren't flying or assisting someone (because red vests apparently can't, despite that being their job?) Then you don't need to be in the terminal or at the gate.
amerson
Rick Amerson 1
I recall a time when a friend dropped me off at SFO right at the time of the flight. I ran to the ticket counter and checked in, then ran to gate and walked down the ramp as they were closing the door. No security checks at all. Those were the days.
cratermoon
Steven Newton 1
Anyone else notice this in the story:

The Following US airports currently offer a Visitor Pass Program:
...

- Ontario International Airport (ONT)
n8596r
Mark Buckner 2
ONT is a Ontario CA
ChrisMarmot
I always do a double take when I see ONT. It's really easy to get Ontario, CA(lifornia)--in the Los Angeles metro area and which has the ONT airport--mixed up with the province of Ontario, CA(nada).
twschmidt4
twschmidt4 1
I liked when my family could see me off and be there when I landed. The gate waiting areas will really be crowded now.
kenish
kenish 1
John Wayne Orange County Airport (KSNA) started an airside pass progam for non-pax about 6 months ago. Security waits at SNA are typically less than 10 minutes, so the impact to passenger wait times is minor.
charlie02vy
This won't leada to any issues, at. all.
jimjallen
Jim Allen 1
Pushing more people through TSA screening won't cause any issues? There should be a separate screening facility for gate pass people outside of the traffic flow. MCO is bad enough.
Kensterfly
Ken Thompson 4
Unlikely to be enough gate pass folks to justify extra resources. Keep that line open for EVERYONE. Besides, the gate pass people are unlikely to be carrying anything to screen. Their egress through security should be very quick.
Having said that, I still think allowing this just for social reasons is a bad idea.
LarryBass
Larry Bassett 0
Why not eliminate the "security checkpoint" and go back to profiling like they did when they actually wanted to catch a potential threat to society, instead of the games they play today?
rmchambers
rmchambers -3
What would we do with all those federal gubment jobs for the folks that would otherwise have to go back to mickey D's for a job?
ggraysonlv
GLENN GRAYSON 0
If you want to go to a gate to meet or help deliver a pax, just buy a refundable ticket, get your boarding pass, go thru security, and cancel your ticket once you've passed the TSA checkpoint. It's a bit of a hassle, but I've done it a few times in the past 10 years.
srobak
srobak 1
Gaming the system and interfering with people who want to buy seats after you but can't because it's sold out. Brilliant idea.
stephenjshaner
s s 0
About damn time for those with families, seniors, children and people who need assistance beyond what the airlines provide. For all those saying it's too crowded, too many people, not enough seats well if that's the price to pay for once again being treated like people instead of suspects, fine by me. Some of my best memories were when my dad left on business trips he would take me to the gate and show me the plane he'd be on.
srobak
srobak 1
People who needed to assist have always been able to get gate passes.
jtwhite928
John White -4
My wife was allowed to take her elderly wheelchair bound mom thru.. Perhaps the program is for minors and handicapped. Better than some deranged psychopath or illegal taking up space??
CCW1
John Prukop -7
9/11 was a False Flag. You were all programmed with the Arab Hi-Jackers theme and their Red Bandana's by government and a complicit media. The WTC towers were demolished by internal explosives and crowd pleasing shock and awe Hollywood style theatrics, including a planted engine on the streets below, but the wrong engine for the type of aircraft that reportedly and allegedly struck the WTC. You've all been conned now for how many years? And the true criminals of this mass-murder event are still at-large and plotting their next fiasco.
n8596r
Mark Buckner 2
Really John?
I had friends that died on those planes.
I bet are a hoot to fly with.
CCW1
John Prukop -2
Your friends may have died "on those planes" - but those planes NEVER struck the WTC. According to Capt. Field McConnell (Former U.S. Navy & Lt. Col USAF/Happy Hooligan's Air National Guard F4C/F16's from Fargo, North Dakota, and former 28+ command pilot career with Northwest Airlines) his U.S. Navy Academy classmate was Captain Chick Burlingame, who was PIC aboard American Airlines 77. McConell aserts AA77 and all on board was disappeared/destroyed out over the Atlantic Ocean in a Warning Area beyond the horizon East of Oceana NAS at Virginia Beach, North Carolina. You may still be able to gather details from one of the videos archived at https://abeldanger.blogspot.com at the top left of the opening page under the "Is It Live, Or is It Livery" tab.

https://abeldanger.blogspot.com/p/videos.html

I wish you well in seeking closure of your friends deaths that DID NOT occur at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. This one video may provide you with some information: https://youtu.be/GAP_fDFjT_o

Your government and a complicit media have lied to you.
srobak
srobak 1
While it is a well known fact that the government hasn't fully divulged the details surrounding 9/11 - your comments here are nothing but being flatly delusional.

Mark thinks you might be a hoot to fly with - I just pray that you are on every DNF list out there.
CCW1
John Prukop 0
YOUR IGNORANCE IS REPULSIVE. You talk like a vaccinated person with turbo brain cancer!
srobak
srobak 1
The only ignorant one here is you... you deny what people saw with their very own eyes. You talk like that not only did you get the jab - but you got it in your brain. WTF is turbo brain cancer? English, MFer - do you speak it?
CCW1
John Prukop -1
Ah, another opportunity to educate! First off, I don't deny what you and other people "saw with their very own eyes" on their TEL-A-LIE-VISION set. However, due to the on-air time delay, it was easy to insert CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) into live broadcasts.

There were NO United or American passenger jets that struck the WTC Towers or the Pentagon.

You may want to read this MIT technology paper, "LYING WITH PIXELS" by Ivan Amato published on July 1, 2000: https://www.technologyreview.com/2000/07/01/236243/lying-with-pixels/

I'm sorry you're not up to speed, but seeing things on TV with your own eyes is no longer believing. The imagery you see on the evening news could well be fake - and it was on 9/11.
srobak
srobak 1
First - I am not referring to people watching TV. I am referring to people watching firsthand with their own eyes from the streets and other buildings - of which there are thousands upon thousands of firsthand accounts documented.

That being said - CGI was not nearly advanced enough in that era to appear as seamless as the video was - especially with the very limited amount of time delay there was at the time. The Big4 national networks all had between 7 and 10 seconds of time delay at that time - and none of the local NY networks had time delay on their broadcasts.

Yes, lying with pixels is a good read - and I have referred to it in the past to some of my classes. However - a further reading of it by you, and a more thorough understanding of both computing technologies as well as video technologies at the time - the primary demonstration was well-prepared and staged, and still resulted in notable artifacts which were not present in the videos of 9/11. In simple terms - the technology was in it's infancy at that time, and not at all capable of producing in real time what you are claiming.

Please either provide indisputable proof of your claims, including an individual accounting of what happened to each of the several hundred passengers which were killed on those flights - or else take your rampant conspiracy theories and expedite your exit from the runway.

This thread, and moreover this site - is not the place for conspiracy theories.
CCW1
John Prukop -1
Here's Capt. Field McConnell with a few answers for your confused state of mind. The video is at the bottom of this link: https://911pilots.org/captain-field-mcconnell/
CCW1
John Prukop -2
Hey Mark, BE SURE AND SCROLL DOWN on this website and read what Captain Dan Hanley has to say about your mislead facts: https://911pilots.org/

You gotta LOT of catching up to do!
CCW1
John Prukop -3
Mark, Here's a new item from Dr. David Martin on 9/11 that you should check out!

Anthony James Hall: https://anthonyjhall.substack.com/p/911-and-the-covid-19-hoax

The 9/11 simulation that went live can be seen as deadly performance art created to prepare the ground of public opinion for mass murder of civilians especially in Muslim-majority countries. The theatrical production was designed by its producers to popularize hatred of Muslims, Persians, Arabs and especially Palestinians.

Concerning that observation, I happened to be home from work on 9/11 preparing with my wife to board a flight for a tour of Spain that was to leave from Dulles Airport later in the day. Learning about the events in NY City and the Pentagon from a frantic call from my youngest son away at college, I turned on WTOP, the local all news radio station. I got to hear them interview a "terrorism expert," a professor at George Washington University whose name I don't recall. What I do recall is that he said, "Maybe now Americans will appreciate what the people of Israel have to face on a daily basis." In retrospect, I think we may regard that interview as a part of the operation, just like the American flags that magically appeared on overpasses everywhere.
CCW1
John Prukop -1
I'm ahead of you on that one Mark as I've been an ardent subscriber of Martin, et al.

As to "srobak" and his wanting an individual accounting of each of the several hundred pax, let me see if I can get a piece of Holly Wood and flick some Pixie Dust. LOL.

All kidding aside, I've been affiliated with Abel Danger for years and worked with forensics investigator David Hawkins from Vancouver, Canada and Captain Field McConnell. See the "Is It Live, o r Is It Livery Archive" videos inset at the top of this page, https://abeldanger.blogspot.com/ for a full review. McConnell was a 28+ year Captain for Northwest Airlines, as well as a former North Dakota Air Guard Happy Hooligan on F4C's and F-16's. One of McConnell's U.S. Naval Academy classmates was Captain Harold "Chick" Burlingame who was the PIC on American 77. Mutual friends of their's were on the F-16's scrambled from Langley on the morining of 9/11/2001. The Abel Danger vids cover a lot of the inside story and how the run-up practice session for 9/11 was "Operation Amalgam Virgo" which was held in June 2001.

As a side note, the entire story of United 93 is just that - a story - and the book about Todd Beamer "Let's Roll" a pure fantasy and an integral part of the anecdotal coverup. UAL 93 did not crash at Shanksville in the hole that was shown on TV.

Bottom line: No real planes could have entered the Twin Towers. There are NO collision effects. This is not a matter of credentials or experience: IT'S SIMPLE PHYSICS! And while some have sought to support the claim that it was a real 767 based upon the engine found at Church & Murray Streets, those who were fabricating evidence in this case didn't get it right, because the engine on the sidewalk was a JTD9 engine.

Moreover, two of the purported 9/11 flights--11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon)--were not even in the air that day. And Pilots tracked the other two--93 (Shanksville) and 175 (South Tower)--which were over Champaign-Urbana, IL, in the first instance (after it had "officially" crashed in PA), and over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, in the second (after it had "officially" hit the South Tower).

Finally, the FAA Registration Data shows that the physical planes used for Flights 93 and 175 were not even deregistered (formally taken out of service) until 28 September 2005, which leaves two pressing questions: How could planes that were not even in the air (11 and 77) have crashed on 9/11? And how could planes that crashed on 9/11 (93 and 175) have still been in the air four years later?

Now go check out "Is It Live or Is It Livery" on Abel Danger.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss