Coalition for Luggage Security promotes postal delivery
Separating luggage from passengers said to improve safety by minimizing bomb threats; move would free up space for lucrative cargo shipping; security concerns remain as long as cargo remains underinspected
The main security problem with airline travel is not with the passengers. It is with their luggage. Each piece, whether checked into the hold or carried on, must be diligently inspected for a large range of dangers, a task for which current technology is often inadequate. Exacerbating the problem considerably is that these inspections must be done at rapid speed, increasing both costs and the risk of operator error. Worst of all, from the perspective of an ailing airline industry, the delays and intrusions manufacture irritated customers just as they are readying to engage with the companies’ products, adding to the foul mood imposed by rising ticket prices and diminished on-board services. The key, some say, it to separate the passenger entirely from his luggage by having it shipped via postal carriers likes UPS.
The idea is not entirely novel. In Japan, the Advanced Airport Systems Technology Research Consortium has been promoting a system in which passengers arrange for their luggage to be picked up at their homes before the flight, tagged with RFID sensors and inspected, and only then put onboard the appropriate flight. This is an interesting program, but in the views of the industry group Coalition for Luggage Security (CLS) it does not go far enough because the risk of an undetected bomb remains so long as the luggage flies with the passengers.
In the scheme proposed by CLS, the security fees currently imposed on travelers in the United States would be replaced by high per-bag fees; to avoid this cost, passengers could ship their bags ahead at a reduced rate via UPS or USPS, freeing up space onboard commercial airlines for high value cargo. The bags would arrive at any location the passenger desires, just like any other piece of mail. Because security would be the responsibility of the carrier, CLS estimates airlines could save as much as $6 billion annually in security labor costs, while generating additional shipping revenues between $15 and $27 billion.
CLS sees this as a solution to the airlines’ commercial woes, but there is one good reason to be wary. As we have reported to the point of fatigue, only 5 percent of air cargo carried on commercial airlines is screened for explosives, a fact CLS conspicuously declines to discuss. Should CLS succeed with its plans, and should cargo screening remain as inadequate as is it today, the total percentage of unscreened packages onboard commercial airlines would actually increase. CLS should be congratulated for the novelty of its proposal, but we fear its time has not yet come.
-read more at the CLS web site
