Ask Gadling: How to get a ticking clock through airport security

by Annie Scott on


Today’s question comes from Joseph, who’s currently traveling in Copenhagen.

“I recently purchased a late 1920s savings bank clock while antique shopping at the Gammel Strand antiques market in Copenhagen, Denmark. I was wondering if you have any advice for transporting the clock, which is still ticking, back to the United States without raising too much suspicion from airport security. I have read too many news articles regarding airport terminals being evacuated because of passengers leaving ticking clocks in their unattended bag and I would prefer to not end up on a Fox News Alert in the near future.“

First, we followed up with Joseph to ensure that the clock is small enough to be carried on the plane. If it were bigger than regulation size, we would have to recommend a specialty shipping company, as checking the clock in a suitcase or box, even if the ticking didn’t bother the security guards (after the usual x-ray), would mean a lot of jostling and probably damage to the clock. Joseph assured us the clock was about 12″ by 2″ wide; definitely small enough.

View more Ask Gadling: Travel Advice from an Expert or send your question to ask [at] gadling [dot] com.

I enlisted the help of our resident pilot, Kent Wien, and our resident flight attendant, Heather Poole, for their airport expertise on this one.

“They can x-ray the item and see that there are no other components necessary for a bomb,” said Kent. “Not a worry at all. He can even have it in a bag if he likes.”

“Can he put it on the conveyor belt? If so, he’s fine,” said Heather.

If the clock is too delicate for the conveyor belt in any way, like you’re concerned that the rubber flaps of the machine might damage the clock face, consider wrapping it in cloth and sticking it in a shopping bag for the security portion of your trip.

Don’t tape it up with styrofoam or other packing materials, making it hard to get to in case of questions.

“If he can hand-carry it,” said Kent, “he’ll have the opportunity to show it to security, which would help.”

Heather suggested asking to have it put in the airplane’s closet for the duration of the flight — that way, it won’t run the risk of damage in the overhead if there’s heavy turbulence (and the ticking won’t freak out your neighbor).

Thanks for the question, Joseph, and congratulations on your find!

Phoenix TSA fails to detect 20 trips with 20 pounds of pot – failure or fearmongering?

by Scott Carmichael on

Fox news in Phoenix is covering the story of two men who were running a regular pot transport scheme, delivering pot to Chicago from their home airport. The men had apparently passed through Phoenix Sky Harbor airport over 20 times, each time with almost 20 pounds of pot.

The story focuses on why the TSA failed to detect the pot, and “what else may be getting through?”. Because the men used airline buddy passes, their regular activity failed to show up on any of the automated watch systems, so they were able to book a ticket, and head directly to the airport.

The TSA issued a statement about the incident: “The mission of the TSA is to ensure the safety of the aviation system and intercept dangerous items.”

To me, that makes perfect sense – the TSA is not in charge of finding or detecting drugs. If a TSA agent happens to find a stash of marijuana hidden in a bag, I’m sure he or she would call for airport law enforcement, but in my opinion, expecting the TSA to add drugs and other items to their search list is just not possible – they have a hard enough time finding guns and bombs. That said, I can understand them not finding the pot once, or maybe twice – but to fail to notice it over twenty times does seem rather excessive.

What do you think? Is it fair to blame the TSA for not finding 20 pounds of pot taken on a plane over 20 times?

%Poll-47435%

Scientists question safety of airport full body scanners

by Scott Carmichael on

As soon as the underpants bomber was caught, the US department of Homeland Security started a rapid deployment of full body scanning equipment. These new scanners can see under clothes, and are designed to check for bombs or other suspicious items.

The technology is by no means new, and the Transportation Security Administrations has been using similar technology for years, but only on a very limited basis. Since the first of these machines made it to an airport, the TSA has been very vocal about telling the traveling public that they are 100% safe, and that we have nothing to worry about.

Except for the risk of too much exposure to ionizing radiation that is…

Scientists at the University of California, San Francisco are disputing the claims that the machines are safe – and have presented their own research on the effects of the radiation from a trip through a whole body scanner.

According to the researchers, the calculated amount of radiation was based upon an average over the whole body – but the number that actually gets deposited in your skin may be higher – though they don’t know by how much.

Rapiscan, who build the majority of the machines being installed around the nation refused to comment on the findings, but the TSA repeated that travelers would need to go through the machines thousands of times just to reach the radiation levels you receive when you get a chest X-ray.

David Brenner, head of Columbia University’s Center for Radiological Research also aired his concerns – “There really is no other technology around where we’re planning to X-ray such an enormous number of individuals. It’s really unprecedented in the radiation world”.

I’m not sure about you – but those findings don’t sit too well with me. I’m obviously not against technologies that can prevent terrorism, but there are limits to what the traveling public should be subjected to. When the scanners were first tested, their purpose was for secondary scanning procedures, not for mass scans of every passenger.

%Poll-46667%

(Photo credit: Getty Images)

Is the liquids ban no more?

by Grant Martin on

It’s hard to remember a time when liquids were openly allowed on a plane, when wine runs to Paris were plausible and when bringing a full water bottle past security wasn’t considered a shame-worthy sin. For several years now the TSA has ardently enforced a 3-1-1 rule, effectively restricting anyone from carrying liquids in containers over 100mL onto an airplane.

As time and tempers have faded, however, so has enforcement. Now when marching through the security line it seems that a few containers over 100mL can slip through the X-ray and that few are asked to remove and display their liquids. Our old friend Chris Elliott writes up a few first hand accounts over at MSNBC, where from his perspective it almost appears that the ban is no longer.

Needless to say, take Mr. Elliott’s experiences with a grain of salt. Officially, the 3-1-1 policy is still in place, and anyone bringing an egregious amount of liquid or citing his article is surely going to get rebuffed. For now, count your blessings that the TSA might be looking the other way and cross your fingers that the policy soon becomes permanent.

Small dick joke has TSA worker beaten up after security scanner incident

by Scott Carmichael on

It was only a matter of time till the whole body imaging machines being installed around the country would set off some kind of nastiness. After the “love those gigantic tits” incident in the United Kingdom last month, the United States is finally getting a taste of the problems these machines can create.

During a training session at Miami International Airport, a TSA supervisor joked about the size of the manhood of one of his colleagues who had just stepped into the machine. The supervisor was operating the equipment when he made the remark – so his joke could have been based on facts.

Rolando Negrin couldn’t appreciate the jokes about his genitalia, so at the end of his shift, he used a police baton to beat up the supervisor in an airport parking garage. The police report states “victim stated he was in fear and complied with [Negron].” after being told to get down on his knees and apologize.

Negron was arrested the next day where he told police he had been made fun of by his co-workers. He has been arrested and booked into the local jail.

As usual – the first thing that comes to mind is that we yet again get evidence of the professionalism of the TSA – the people hired to protect our skies apparently think it is OK to assault someone in a parking garage. That said – I can totally understand why someone would get a little upset over a bunch of “small dick” jokes, especially if said colleagues have actually seen naked images of you.

Of course, this is the worst kind of PR you can possible get when trying to convince the public about the effectiveness of whole body imagers. We’ve all been told that our privacy is safe, and that images will never be stored – but the good folks at the TSA managed to screw that up in just one afternoon, all thanks to their juvenile pranks.

For all the details on the incident, head on over to The Smoking Gun for the police affidavit.

Update: The TSA blog has issued a statement about the incident. As usual, they are “taking it seriously” and are “looking into it”.