Suvarnabhumi Airport To Introduce Body Scanners

[siampolee]

Can one play computer games on these proposed scanners as one could on the other machines installed?

If my memory serves me correct there were some flaws in the security system concerning the baggage scanners some time ago which allowed the uploading of games.

I seem to remember some comments about somewhat interesting nature studies material being uploaded to to the computer system for the edification and education of its operators..

As a result of the programmes being uploaded to the baggage scanning machines those machines were thus infected infected with a malicious virus thus putting them out of commission for a time.

[californiabeachboy]

No big deal. I went through a body scanner on my last trip from US to Thailand when flying out of US. It added 15 seconds to a 15 hour trip. For those who feel it is a violation of your privacy, big brother, etc. I understand what you are saying... but, maybe we can have two different flights - for those who feel scanners are a violation, and those who do not. I will always be on the second.

[rametindallas]

It's been statistically proven these machines kill more people from cancer then they do save people from terrorists

How were those statistics obtained? Number of people dying from cancer compared to number of terrorists apprehended using the equipment in airports employing the scanners?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray

30 times higher than the death risk from a terrorist attack on a plane. http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-food/Environment/full_body_scanners_2611101018.html

As long as YOU are not the sensitive one or have a background of radiation doses then don't worry. But the whole point is that they don't detect the bomb the 'underwear' bomber had nor the shoe bombers bomb. These machine are for show and for some U.S. companies to make profits and bureauocracys to get bigger and have more control over the citizenry. Dogs and profiling like the Israelis are the way to go if you are serious.

[otissp]

I am not going through no body scanners...this is not Ameri(k)a. If they want to search me, they can, but do not treat us like f**king criminals or terrorists. You can introduce them all you want, but I am not going through those highly radioactive emitters-10 times than normal; not to mention someone(s) viewing your naked body.

Get ready not to fly then! Leaving Manchester Airport last month everyone had to go through a body scanner. Opting for a search didn't seem to be an option.The scanner showed an outline of the body with coloured boxes highlighting items of interest in pockets or elsewhere concealed Everyone is treated like a terrorist these days until proven otherwise. Start worrying if someone ever takes a bomb on a plane hidden up their poop chute. If that happens we'll all be getting cavity searches before we get on a flight. You'd better get used to the idea of body scanners as the security check area of an airport probably isn't the best place to make a stand in this kind of thing. Try getting angry and tell them what you said in your post and you might get a few extra nights free accomodation:-)

So far the UK is the only country to make it mandatory. I have a strict no-scanner policy for my person so this means I'm not going to the UK. Seriously. If I absolutely had to go, I'd go by chunnel or something. These scanners are ridiculous. I have opted out in the US and in the Netherlands and the airport personnel seem to think it's their job to argue with you and make you feel like a Terrorizer for refusing to go through the scanner. Anyway, I'm not going through these things unless I find myself in a situation with no realistic option. I have a friend in the UK who invited me to visit him and his family. I actually wanted to go, but declined after finding about about the mandatory scanners. I'm just not going to go there.

[otissp]

No big deal. I went through a body scanner on my last trip from US to Thailand when flying out of US. It added 15 seconds to a 15 hour trip. For those who feel it is a violation of your privacy, big brother, etc. I understand what you are saying... but, maybe we can have two different flights - for those who feel scanners are a violation, and those who do not. I will always be on the second.

That's because you haven't rationally considered all the risks involved.

The big frightening images of underpants bombers dropping planes out of the sky have gotten you frightened into yielding more of your (and everyone else's) privacy and autonomy to the government. Were you aware of the fact that the underpants bomber, even if he had succeeded in detonating his skivvies, could not possibly have brought the plane down from the sky? Would have killed him and a few people around him at most.

Since it isn't actually a realistic option to actually have two parallel sets of airport security for two different kinds of airplanes, we can't enact your proposed solution, unless you have an extra $50 trillion in your pocket to pay for it over the next few decades. That being the case, we have to decide on only one solution. I think the facts and a rational analysis show that yours is wrong.

If you have the extra $50 trillion to set up two parallel sets of air transport systems, that's cool, we can do it, and you can have your scanners. If you like, you can even drop your pants and spread your arse for the security people, too. If they set up an efficient system whereby people walked through the scanners, then bent over, dropped the pants, and had a quick spread by the security personnel, it would add just another minute or so to security, and would stop the Rectal Bombers who will hit where the underpants bombers can't. That's fine with me, I'll still opt for the other line.

However, given that it is unrealistic to actually implement two sets of airport systems in parallel, we have to choose the most rational one. So you can't win the argument by default by making a statement such as "Set up two systems, and I'll take the more intrustive one, thanks".

The government is not necessary the good guy, you know. The balance of power between government and people is a very sensitive and important thing, and irrational analysis combined with irrational fears of Terrorizers allow law enforcement/governments to continue to increase their powers of surveillance, discipline, and control of their populations. With facial recognition technology, cameras in public places, the interwebs, and people like you just going along with things because of irrational anxiety, we're headed for some spooky Orwellian times in the future.

Edited September 6, 2011 by otissp

[thailandcalling]

Guilty until proven innocent

[otissp]

Here's an apropos cartoon.

http://www.gocomics.com/tomthedancingbug/2010/11/26

[scotto]

Everybody has it wrong these machines are only to see if you have spent your last dollar

in thailand!!!

TaT only wants to make sure they get maximum return on there advertising dollar!!

Mai ben rai

We could all start stripping off at the scanners and tell them we want to be patted down by that

pretty young thing over there ?

That would be funny!!

[lazygourmet]

When -and if- in operation, this could be a daily pic:

[Richard4849]

Everybody has it wrong these machines are only to see if you have spent your last dollar

in thailand!!!

TaT only wants to make sure they get maximum return on there advertising dollar!!

Mai ben rai

We could all start stripping off at the scanners and tell them we want to be patted down by that

pretty young thing over there ?

That would be funny!!

And TAT will profit how, exactly?

[Lannig]

I don't think the point is security at all.

I can smell the odor of massive amounts of money going under the table, premium price paid for sub-standard, possibly second hand equipment (bought from the Germans maybe?). Anyone remembers the baggage scanners?

[Richard4849]

I don't think the point is security at all.

I can smell the odor of massive amounts of money going under the table, premium price paid for sub-standard, possibly second hand equipment (bought from the Germans maybe?). Anyone remembers the baggage scanners?

Massive amounts of money? How? The whole project budget is only a piddling 100 million baht!

[lannarebirth]

So, no young girls running their hands all over your body looking for contraband. Seems like a huge step backwards to me.

[nycpal44]

I think it is a good thing to have the full body scanners installed, it will help to narrow down and identify drug smuggeling in and out of the country.

Yes, it will add waiting time for passengers for sure, but this is the same with any airport in the US and Europe. 2 weeks ago my waiting time for security scanning at Kennedy airport in New York took way over 1 hour.

[lannarebirth]

I don't think the point is security at all.

I can smell the odor of massive amounts of money going under the table, premium price paid for sub-standard, possibly second hand equipment (bought from the Germans maybe?). Anyone remembers the baggage scanners?

Of course we remember the baggage scanner. Yaowapa was the bag lady ( and to a lesser extent her husband Somchai) for everything related to Suwwannapoom. I guess she's back in business, eh?

[siamiam]

Can anyone share recent experience of flying out of Kuala Lumpur? Are body scanners used there, any plans to use them there?

[Richard4849]

I don't think the point is security at all.

I can smell the odor of massive amounts of money going under the table, premium price paid for sub-standard, possibly second hand equipment (bought from the Germans maybe?). Anyone remembers the baggage scanners?

Of course we remember the baggage scanner. Yaowapa was the bag lady ( and to a lesser extent her husband Somchai) for everything related to Suwwannapoom. I guess she's back in business, eh?

Yaowapa wouldn't roll over in bed for a 20% piece of 100 million baht!

[connor6063]

I am not going through no body scanners...this is not Ameri(k)a. If they want to search me, they can, but do not treat us like f**king criminals or terrorists. You can introduce them all you want, but I am not going through those highly radioactive emitters-10 times than normal; not to mention someone(s) viewing your naked body.

Good luck getting in and out of Thailand by Air then. :jap:

Dont worry as long as ur not trying to take drugs in and out ull be fine. Also before going on the terrible 30-40 hour trips to america you wana get strip searched first? id like the scanner

[connor6063]

So, no young girls running their hands all over your body looking for contraband. Seems like a huge step backwards to me.

Agreed

[siamiam]

All these cancer fearers are going to take one look at the lines for pat down and choose the scanner in about two seconds. What a bunch of wind bags.

I wonder if the idiot talking about cancer uses a cell phone?

Wind bags and idiots? Why, because we have a different view of the subject? Or, maybe you are just the type that enjoys taking a piss where the consequences are not great; a public forum where you can remain anonymous.

[siamiam]

I'd rather fly naked then go in these cancer machines. It's been statistically proven these machines kill more people from cancer then they do save people from terrorists and that's not even mentioning people that have gone through these things with box cutters, etc without problems.

Cancer machines, waste of money, waste of electricity and wastes people's time. DO NOT WANT!

As A technician working on Scanners and Backscatter vans for the military I would love to see the studies and facts you are basing your statistics on. Can you supply some links or tell me where I can get a hold of this information

As A technician working on Scanners and Backscatter vans for the military, I would think you could easily find the studies without help. Maybe you are just trying to make a point?

These links lead to articles that possibly will not contain the kind of info that a person like you is looking for, but others might find them interesting and you might be able to start a worthwhile search using the names of the scientists and other information given.

this is very brief and seems to be a summary of other articles appearing elsewhere in the last two years.

http://www.appletrav...news-10523.html

this one is regarding two major U.S. airline's pilots being told by their union to avoid the body scanners, and why.

http://www.upi.com/T...15201289496756/

this leads to a PDF downlowd for info on screening people with backscatter devices.

http://www.as-e.com/pdf/Health-Physics-Screening-Individuals.pdf

You can find information to support either point of view on this subject. There is one website called 'infowars' which seems an appropriate enough name for what is involved here. My own feeling is that the scanners using millimeter wave technology are safer (less dangerous) than those that use backscatter technology.

Edited September 6, 2011 by siamiam

[siamiam]

Even Germany has decided not to introduce these bodyscanners - after they tested them for 10 month at Hamburg airport!

They are not reliable and produced so many false alarms which called for time consuming additional checks by security personell that the German government decided they need to be developed further before they are introduced at all airports.

800.000 people used the scanners during the test period and in 49 % they caused false alarms !

Oh... so now the Germans are your measuring stick for such matters? I suppose it is irrelevant that the Aussies, Americans, Brits, Canadians, Dutch, French, Nigerians and a host of other countries ARE using it? But Germany said no, so I guess that's the final word.

I'd welcome seeing all the research you pored over in making your decision . I just went through the scan in the US a few months ago. As fast (or faster) than the standard check. No pain. No slow down. And no sense of frying my cells with radiation. According to studies (for comparison) a single scan using backscatter technology produces exposure equivalent to two minutes of flying on an airplane, and the energy projected by millimeter wave technology is thousands of times less than a cell phone transmission. So you may as well skip the flight and hang up your phone while you're not going through security.

"I'd welcome seeing all the research you pored over in making your decision ."

"And no sense of frying my cells with radiation."

Ok, so you felt no sense of damage during or after your trip through the scanner. That's not exactly what I call pouring over research. And, it doesn't work that way. Low levels of radiation wouldn't cause you to notice any damage, not now anyway. It would show up, if it ever shows up, years from now, and it would be something that you couldn't say deffinitively was caused by the body scanners that you went through all those years ago. Something like actinic keratosis, a precancerous skin malady, or maybe eye cateracts. Both of these ailemnets are also caused by sun exposure.

The 'downwinders' of Nevada didn't feel anything either, when they were exposed to radiation during the nuclear tests of the 1950's. Many of them are feeling it now.

[Kinnock]

An arguably miniscule increase in cancer risk, a probable increase in delays and a definite inconvenience .... what's not to like?

[siamiam]

An arguably miniscule increase in cancer risk, a probable increase in delays and a definite inconvenience .... what's not to like?

I am not so sure of what the risk is. As far as delays and inconvenience goes, I think those would be sorted out relatively quickly. During the time that body scanners were being used at Suvarnabhumi (before use was discontinued) there was no delay or inconvenience to speak of. I always opted for the pat-down, which took more time than going through the body scanner. Maybe locating the screening point on a higher floor will cause a delay at Suvarnabhumi, but in general, not in most world locations.

Below is a link to an article titled: 'Opting Out of Full Body Image Scanning at the Airport – UCSF Faculty Concerned Over X-Rays – 100x Stronger Than Assumed?'

This article touches on information brought up by a poster previously on this thread regarding concentrated radiation from these scanners at the skin.

http://sfcitizen.com...r-than-assumed/

[rogerdee123]

An arguably miniscule increase in cancer risk, a probable increase in delays and a definite inconvenience .... what's not to like?

I am not so sure of what the risk is. As far as delays and inconvenience goes, I think those would be sorted out relatively quickly. During the time that body scanners were being used at Suvarnabhumi (before use was discontinued) there was no delay or inconvenience to speak of. I always opted for the pat-down, which took more time than going through the body scanner. Maybe locating the screening point on a higher floor will cause a delay at Suvarnabhumi, but in general, not in most world locations.

Below is a link to an article titled: 'Opting Out of Full Body Image Scanning at the Airport – UCSF Faculty Concerned Over X-Rays – 100x Stronger Than Assumed?'

This article touches on information brought up by a poster previously on this thread regarding concentrated radiation from these scanners at the skin.

http://sfcitizen.com...r-than-assumed/

The major risk is to blood pressure .... while you are waiting in another line while your airplane is boarding .... knowing the bloody scanners aren't that accurate anyway ..... and someone's relative probably became a millionaire selling the bloody things at inflated prices.

Why don't they just use those wonderful bomb detectors they use in the south?

[Lannig]

I don't think the point is security at all.

I can smell the odor of massive amounts of money going under the table, premium price paid for sub-standard, possibly second hand equipment (bought from the Germans maybe?). Anyone remembers the baggage scanners?

Massive amounts of money? How? The whole project budget is only a piddling 100 million baht!

Ahem... projected budget, right?

Well, I am willing to bet that the final cost will be 2 or 3 times that, just as it happened for the baggage scanners.

And the difference between the price paid and the real value starts to convert to quite a few top-of-the-line Volvos, BMWs or Benz for the handful of concerned people at AoT.

Edited September 7, 2011 by Lannig

[CHIEFOFFICER]

I wonder why they can procure technology the Germans can't. According to them the stuff isn't developed to a stage where its implementation would make sense. See here...

http://www.flightglo...y-scanners.html

It was already mentioned:IT IS NOT ABOUT SECURITY IT IS ABOUT MONEY:

TIT :jap:

[lannarebirth]

An arguably miniscule increase in cancer risk, a probable increase in delays and a definite inconvenience .... what's not to like?

Whta's not ot like about it is, that absolutely NOONE wants it except for the company selling it and his bought and paid for government counterparty. These kinds of incursions on my personal freedom are why I travel at least 50% less than I used to.

[Oberkommando]

All part of the campaign to get this terrible airport back into the World's top 20 no doubt.

[asiaexpat]

Can anyone share recent experience of flying out of Kuala Lumpur? Are body scanners used there, any plans to use them there?

Departed KL from LCCT last Thursday. No scanners and departure procedures were quick and efficient.