"In Australia you need a photo ID to enter a licensed venue, but not to board a flight!" Roger Henning, Founder, Homeland Security Asia Pacific
Letters: Airport security, the constitution and the NBN
A visible presence, but the holes in security are obvious. Justin McManus
by Letters
Basic steps to tighten airport security
When will the government implement the necessary protective security measures to minimise the risk of a terrorist attack on civil aviation, and require airlines to assure the travelling public as to who and what is flying on their aircraft.
Anyone at our city and regional airports can board a domestic aircraft without ever producing identification. Simply check in online or at an electronic kiosk (including checked baggage), obtain your boarding pass, pass through security screening, and proceed to the boarding gate then onto the aircraft! Or, simply hand your boarding pass to one of the thousands of people in the sterile area, many of whom are not flying.
You, and your ticket and baggage, are never matched.
The bottom line is that our domestic carriers cannot guarantee who or what is travelling in their aircraft.
There are six basis steps to improving aviation security that should be implemented at all domestic airports immediately:
•Automated passenger profiling from the point of ticket purchase (national database interfaced with select government agencies and all airlines).
•Ticket-passenger verification (photo ID) prior to screening – only flying passengers permitted to proceed to the sterile concourse area.
• Scalable risk-based security screening (not everyone presents the same risk) incorporating automated full body scanning.
• Secondary ticket/passenger verification (photo ID) at the boarding gate.
• Replace the low-paid private security personnel working at our airports with a competent and highly motivated government aviation security force forming part of our border protection force. We do this for customs and quarantine inspection, why not security?
• Replace the Aviation Security Identification Card issued to employees, concessionaires and contractors working at our airports with biometric access control and ID –start tracking the person, not the card.
Anything less is simply a cost-driven politically expedient approach to our safety.
Mike Carmody, Former chief of security, Sydney Airport, Forde, ACT
Jet blast from a plane kills a tourist at a Caribbean airport
A sign near St. Maarten’s Princess Juliana International Airport warns people about the danger from airplane jet engines.
A tourist from New Zealand was killed by the blast of a plane at an airport in the Dutch Caribbean island of St. Maarten.
The 57-year-old woman, who was not identified, was hanging onto a fence to watch the plane leave Wednesday, the island’s police said on Facebook.
The jet’s blast was so powerful, it knocked her down, police said. She later died.
Watching planes land and take off at Princess Juliana International Airport is a well-known tourist attraction, as approaching aircraft tend to fly very low above their heads.
But both airport and local authorities warn against getting too close to the planes, calling the practice “extremely dangerous.”
Police didn’t say what kind of plane was involved in Wednesday’s incident.
Island authorities say they have taken necessary precautions to warn tourists not to get too close to planes. They’ve placed signs and they patrol the area to warn people, the police department said.
Thrill-seekers and tourists have been watching planes take off and land at the airport since it opened in 1943.
It is worth highlighting a suggestion posted on Facebook by Paul TrueschlerIn know it’s a tourist attraction, but please install a small deflector to at least reduce the blast effects. It can still be exciting while becoming safer.
Hope the Dutch Caribbean island of St. Maarten Airport Authorities instal a small deflector, to reduce the risk of injury and death of future visitors.
Safety concerns over soft tarmac spots at Suvarnabhumi airport by IATA.
In a report focussing on airport infrastructure in Thailand, IATA has highlighted an urgent need to address soft tarmac spots at Suvarnabhumi Airport (BKK).
Temporary remedial repairs have been carried out on the runway tarmac, but reported incidents are steadily increasing, and IATA has urged Airports of Thailand (AoT) to urgently commit to a permanent solution.
Soft tarmac issues that result in runway closures and disruption have significant knock-on effects
IATA’s overwhelming concern regards safety, but soft tarmac issues that result in runway closures and disruption have significant knock-on effects.
These include:
• Delays resulting in missed onward connections, lost or delayed luggage
• Costs as a result of passenger re-routing due to missed connecting flights, hotel costs, and passenger compensation
• Gate changes caused by capacity constraints and repairs, resulting in passenger complaints and missed onward connections
• Fuel costs and delays caused by imposed holding patterns, and taxiing congestion as a result of capacity issue
• Impairing slot management and takeoff efficiencies
IATA also revealed its support for the approval of terminal expansion plans at BKK. With passenger numbers already surpassing the terminal design capacity of 45 million per year—and demand growing by 10% annually—expansion is vital if the airport is to meet demand.
The development of U-Tapao (Pattaya) as a third Bangkok airport would be an error
Another Bangkok airport, Don Mueng (DMK), meanwhile, experienced demand growth of 21.34% in 2016, driven by a surge in low-cost carrier passengers.
Although recognizing the pressure the Thai Government is under to meet demand, IATA believes the development of U-Tapao (Pattaya) as a third Bangkok airport would be an error. IATA instead believes the focus should be on maximizing throughput and efficiently using the facilities at BKK and DMK.
Lone-wolf radio hoaxer hacks Melbourne air traffic control
Federal police are hunting a lone-wolf radio hoaxer who made 15 illegal transmissions to air-traffic controllers and domestic passenger pilots last month – including one telling a Virgin pilot to abort a landing.
The agencies investigating the incidents believe only one person has made the transmissions by finding a way to tap into the air traffic control frequency and communicate directly with planes and control towers.
AFP hunt for Melbourne air traffic control hoaxer
The Australian Federal Police are investigating a series of hoax calls to air traffic controllers and domestic pilots. Vision courtesy ABC News Melbourne.
Flight data shows the plane came close to the runway at 5.19pm as it approached Tullamarine Airport. Then three minutes later the plane climbed to 3800 feet and started circling over north-west Melbourne – all under orders from the hoax air-traffic controller.
John Lyons, president of Virgin Independent Pilots Australia, said rogue radio transmissions were “a concern” because pilots must obey instructions from air traffic controllers but may not be able to verify who is or isn’t a legitimate controller.A radio hoaxer told a Virgin pilot to abort a landing. Photo: Tian Law
Later that evening, the hoax caller impersonated the pilot of a light aircraft. He issued a mayday call and pretended to be experiencing engine trouble. The ABC have posted audio where air traffic control personnel are trying to assess the mayday call. An air traffic controller then communicates with the light aircraft which the unauthorised individual is pretending to pilot.
“I can see you there now. Roger your mayday. Could you please advise what your situation is,” the air traffic control operator asks.
“Engine failure,” the hoax caller replies. “Descending passing through 4500.”
Mr Lyons said rudimentary amateur VHF radio equipment could be used in such a hoax.
Avalon Airport. Photo: James Davies
“It’s not hard for someone to obtain,” he said. “There’s a lot of people that spend a lot of time observing aircraft at airports, and many of them have radios that monitor frequencies. But most of them just listen.
“In a worst case scenario, an aircraft will be told to go around, but there’s an aircraft on a runway crossing that runway.”
Mr Lyons said rogue transmissions also pose a risk because if someone pretends to be a pilot issuing a distress call, that call gets top priority from traffic controllers.
The union boss, who was a pilot for 48 years, said rogue broadcasters would have to be close to a plane in order to tell it to turn around.
“Normally VHF would require them to be in line of site of the aircraft,” he said.
Mr Lyons said the investigating agencies were doing everything they could to eliminate safety risks.
The Australian Federal police are yet to make any arrests in relation to the incidents. Also investigating are the Australian Communications and Media Authority and Airservices Australia – a government-owned ‘air navigation’ company.
None of the three agencies would comment further last night. Sources said this was for fear of copycat amateur radio operators trying to do the same thing.
However, Fairfax Media understands it is relatively easy to track rogue radio transmissions – but only when the signal is live. It is not known if authorities made attempts to track the rogue transmitter while he was making fake broadcasts.
Police warn the offender could face 20 years in jail. The incidents happened to controllers and pilots at or near Tullamarine and Avalon airports.
The AFP’s head of Crime Operations, acting Assistant Commissioner Chris Sheehan, said today the public could be assured there was no risk to safety.
However the ABC reported on Monday night that a Virgin Australia passenger flight from the Gold Coast to Melbourne aborted its landing only 80 metres from the tarmac on October 27. According to the ABC the incident happened around 5:00pm on October 27. The aircraft changed its altitude and course under the instruction of the unauthorised person transmitting from an unknown location.
“These incidents are being thoroughly investigated by the AFP, with technical support from the ACMA,” says Assistant Commissioner Chris Sheehan.”The airlines have been briefed to ensure the advice has been passed on to their pilots and to ensure appropriate measures are in place.”
Aircraft do not use encrypted frequencies like police because air traffic control need to respond quickly to incidents and have planes coming in from interstate as well as overseas. To move all aircraft in Australia to an encrypted system would be very costly.
At Leeds-Bradford airport in Britain in 2010, investigators from the airport’s anti-terrorism Project Griffin probed two incidents of hoaxers – or ‘pirates’ – trying to communicate with planes which were landing or taking off.
All airlines have individual call signs and all air traffic controllers use special VHF frequencies – but all this information is freely available online.
According to Australia’s Aviation Transport Act, interfering with aircraft navigation facilities or “putting the safety of an aircraft at risk by communicating false information” are in the same class of offence as taking control of an aircraft, damaging an aircraft or planting a dangerous item onboard.
A radio hoaxer told a Virgin pilot to abort a landing. Photo: Tian Law