Has Flying Become Safer Since Sept. 11?

N E W   Y O R K, March 11, 2002 -- A lot has changed since Sept. 11, as anyone who has waited in a long security line at an airport can attest.

A flurry of new regulations now govern commercial flights in the United States, with many of the laws mandated by the historic Aviation Security and Transportation Security Act that Congress passed in November.

But not all of the measures have taken effect yet, and in some cases it will be many months before airline security reaches the levels mandated by the new laws.

Indeed, some government officials have expressed concern that not enough improvements have been made yet. Kenneth Mead, the Transportation Department's inspector general, told a House committee in February there were still "alarming lapses" in the nation's air security system.

So what really is different in the U.S. airline industry, six months after the worst episode in its history? When you board a jetliner, is it truly safer than it was in September? Here is a look at what changes have already taken place and what else is in store for air travelers.

Baggage Screening — The Need for Machines: As mandated by the aviation security bill, all bags loaded onto planes on domestic flights must now be checked for explosive devices. The Federal Aviation Administration is hoping to have the screening done by bomb-detection machines by the end of the year.

For that to happen, however, the FAA will need to have more than 2,000 new machines in place at major airports, which currently use a small fraction of that number. To this point, the $1 million machines are made by just two companies — InVision and L-3 Communications — who currently produce smaller quantities than are needed. InVision, for instance, has been making 10 a month, but has indicated it could increase production to five times that amount.

So far this year, the Transportation Department has ordered 100 machines from each firm and is bringing a third, newly-certified company into the fold. But while Deputy Transportation Secretary Michael Jackson has promised, "We'll hit the end-of-the-year target," members of Congress are openly skeptical about the deadline. Until all the machines are ready, bags will have to be checked manually at most airports by baggage screeners, National Guard personnel and even bomb-sniffing dogs.

Baggage Screening, Part 2 — The New Federal Work Force: Another major element of the congressional bill made the country's baggage screening workers federal employees at major airports across the country. Traditionally, private companies have handled screening, but numerous lapses by companies like Argenbright Security led Congress to make the change.

It hasn't happened yet, though. The size of the baggage screening work force — 30,000 people — means a huge turnover in workers must take place, and the change will be made gradually from May until Nov. 19, which marks the one-year limit dictated by the congressional bill.

Many of the current screeners could become part of the new, federalized work force. But Transportation Secretary Norm Mineta also announced on March 4 a hiring drive for new baggage screeners, proclaiming it a "major step in the recruitment and deployment of a modern, well-trained and highly qualified federal security workforce."

Matching Bags: Although dropped from the aviation security bill last November during House-Senate negotiations, the FAA began mandating, effective Jan. 18, that on most domestic flights, the airlines should match bags loaded onto airplanes with the list of passengers actually boarding the flight. Although in theory the same bags will already be screened for explosives, this measure adds a level of deterrence for potential terrorists.

Bag-matching — which the airlines have long resisted on domestic flights, although they have done it as a standard practice on international flights for over a decade — is still only required for originating flights. Bags transferred to connecting flights, which comprise about a quarter of all routes, still do not have to be matched.

The Transportation Security Administration announced a pilot program in February, however, to see if bag-matching on connections can be done efficiently, with Mead saying, "The gap in the process for passengers with connecting flights needs to be closed."

Air Marshals: Armed air marshals have been a stealthy presence on many U.S. flights since the fall. The plainclothes security officers tend to be seated near the cockpits of planes and are supposed to intervene in case of hijacking attempts.

News reports indicate that around 1,000 air marshals are currently employed on domestic flights, up from about 50 before Sept. 11. Still, with roughly 35,000 daily commercial flights of all sizes taking off every day in the U.S., it seems unlikely that marshals are on board more than a fraction of all routes.

That number should increase in the near future, since the newly-created Transportation Security Administration has announced another hiring program for air marshals, and the FAA claims it has received 150,000 applications for the positions.

Cockpit Protection — Stronger Doors … And Guns?: In accordance with the air security act, the FAA has ordered cockpit doors to be reinforced on 6,000 commercial planes — although that particular deadline is not until April 9, 2003. In the meantime, two-thirds of those planes are slated to have short-term modifications installed, such as internal locks on the cockpits doors. On many planes, these short-term improvements are already in place.

The pilots' association has been lobbying vigorously this month to allow their members to carry guns in the cockpits, which they feel would make them safer. Opponents of the idea say having guns on the plane could backfire if the weapons fell into the wrong hands during an attempted hijacking.

"I do not believe we should have lethal weapons in the cockpit," Mineta said last week. It remains to be seen what the final verdict will be in this case. United Airlines, for one, has begun training crews to use stun guns in case of emergency, rather than lethal weapons.

National Guard: Since September, more than 6,000 National Guard troops have been patrolling about 400 U.S. commercial airports. Originally set to end their stint in March, the troops, thanks to a Bush administration request last week, seem likely to stay on the job until May 31. In some cases, they may still be used to conduct baggage screening as well as providing extra physical security.

On the Ground — Limiting Access: A crucial part of the so-called "soft underbelly" of air security involves the wide variety of workers — from catering personnel to mechanics and many others — who have access to airplanes sitting on the ground at airports.

The aviation security act mandated tougher checks on ground workers, but some of the world's most frequent flyers — flight attendants — remain unconvinced that every airport is enforcing the law tightly enough.

"It is beyond important that everyone who has access to the plane or high-security areas of the airport go through a screening process," says Dawn Deeks of the Association of Flight Attendants in Washington, D.C. "It's not enough to just look at an easily falsifiable ID card."

Another issue is ID card fraud for airport personnel. In recent months, dozens of people have been arrested and accused of fraudulently trying to obtain access to high-security airport areas in Atlanta, Boston, Miami and Salt Lake City.

Carry-On Restrictions: The airlines will continue to enforce tight restrictions, instituted as soon as planes began flying again in September, limiting the kinds of objects passengers can pack in their carry-on bags. Knives, most scissors and golf clubs are out, but umbrellas and tweezers are still allowed. The airlines have also occasionally seized larger items like sickles and saws.

There have been occasionally security lapses, though, involving cases where passengers (or journalists testing the screening process) have carried weapons on board planes.

Bottom line: The crackdown is on, but appears to be less than completely foolproof.

That, in fact, could describe the current state of airline security as a whole.