Young boy takes flight from BRU to Malaga without any papers

[RoMax]

Why would the destination (Schengen or non-Schengen) be the only condition for a head count?

It was not an opinion or a statement, it was just a comment on JAF's procedures...

Been on a GVA to BRU flight (intra-Schengen) this last Thursday, and there was definitely a head count prior to closing the doors. This was EZY and a jetway was being used.

Indeed, I've also experienced headcounts on Schengen flights with other airlines. But again, my previous comment didn't have to do anything with that as it wasn't my opinion on how it should be, it was just my experience of JAF's procedures.

[Tomskii]

Easyjet even does it so to come to a conclusion of the endless discussion about headcounts: some airlines do it on schengen flights, others don't.

[cathay belgium]

Discussion about headcounts isn't necessary!
Guess this event proves they are necessary and needed!
JAF,Gate and handling agents and customs are a joke at BRU...
Indeed even I passed BRU security with a meat cutting knife once until SXF customs found it on my return leg the same day!
Again this proves BRU lacks a serious attitude,..
Proving that this event was a one time lucky shot is admitting you can't handle the situation imo!
One time to many,.. this is a joke that may not have happend..
Not one party was wrong, a series of personnel failed, and that is even worse IMO!

Learn about this event, and quick please!

CXB

[cnc]

well my girlfriend is a SCCM at JAF and she always performs a headcount...

[Tomskii]

@Cathay: French media a couple of years ago succeeded in getting a hand weapon through secu at CDG and Nice (thus not the smallest airports in france) by just having it dissasembled. Secu even looked at it, even I who knows completely nothing about handguns, knows how guns look like, even disassembled..

There is (not everywhere) but in a majority of Europan airports a lack of good secu. SXF is a example on how it should be (even if I think they are a bit too severe). Secu at CRL btw is a total joke as well. Can't take liquids above 100ml but if you put it in a bag you buy from them it is allowed... wtf is that about.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

Don't need comparison with CDG or SXF or CRL they failed here .. end point!
It's not that it can't happen, it might not happen,..
A basic knowledge of weapons and their parts should have known by security otherwise it isn't worth this name!
Maybe it isn't that easy but so it should be..
Okay the kid had not a weapon,but security is also knowing which person is on which plane,
so a more closed ID check and boarding pass should be integrated in the process,..
Not that shengen feeling but..
If the plane should have crashed,.. how would the kid ever be identified as a victim of the disaster??
Was the kid missing by child abduction,obuse?
Thats also a readon for headcount and a right pax list,..
Or should all missing kids have a DNA check on that extra body in the wreck? Guess not..
Thats my point !
CXB

[RoMax]

Look we can all talk about more strict security rules at BRU. But if the currently active security measurements would have been taken like they should, this could not have happened. So better wait to see how the boy managed to pass all that before speculating about extra security at the airport.

This is not a story of just BRU, this is also about JAF, Swissport and the federal police.

At this point, with what we can find in the media,I really have no clue how he did it, so it's way too early to speculate and start blaming BRU as a whole. That's like with a crash involging a pilot error, where the pilot didn't follow the airline procedures, and tough still blaming the whole airline because he didn't do his job.

Not saying BRU is not to be blamed, just to say a lot of the thing said here are simply based on speculation.

[cathay belgium]

ROMAX,
You're maybe right but I guess that a boy that age,didn't had a plan, he just succeed in doing it and so started a failure of multiple responsables and departments
If the security did their job as they should have done,.. yes! but they didn't ...
Not asking for more security just need a security which know their job and take it serious.
Would be great to see the boy showing what and how he done it on TV, de kruitfabriek ?!
Lesson for all kidz and securities around the world !
CXB :p

[tolipanebas]

Guys,

I don't want to spoil your fun debating this story, but just to point out that there's no need to fall over eachother in order to point out an alledged SECURITY problem, because quite frankly there isn't.

Sure, the little boy flew without a ticket and that's in fact both a COMMERCIAL and PROCEDURAL failure, but that's something completely different from a SECURITY failure, which is the word almost everybody has been using here.

Remember the little boy still passed through the security screenposts just like all other passengers, didn't he, so SECURITY itself was never at risk. If JAF subsequently let screened passengers fly without holding a boarding pass and thus paying for a ticket, than that's really just a commercial/procedural problem of theirs, nothing more.



To summarize how things are done at BRU:
1- access to the Schengen terminal in BRU requires only a valid boarding pass. It needn't even be on your name, nor does it have to be to the date, which explains the automated access system in use now.
2- security screenposts then check ALL persons, regardless the reason of their visit. They don't check your ID nor your boarding pass.
3- at the gate, the airline better checks if the persons boarding their flight have actually paid for it from a revenues point of view, but that's just up to them really, as potential security issues have been taken care off.

[9vsmu]

I don't want to minimize security/safety, but one needs to realize it needs to we workable and commercially intresting as well. The alternative is a very tight security and that includes : everybody shows up at the airport std -04h00 and everybody needs to be at the gate std -01h00. On top of that nobody is allowed to complain when large waiting lines exist. This will allow all security staff to do his/her job properly. No flexibility whatsoever towards the passenger will be tolerated.

Maybe something to think about.

[b720]

I agree, I do not think that any one wants to be at the airport 4 hours before the flight, and at the gate an hour before boarding. The current system works quite well. We do not know the circumstances around the stowaway's departure. he might have found a lost boarding pass on the floor at the main departure hall - how many of us have dropped a boarding pass, or seen one on the floor - used it to pass the scan at terminal A..This can happen at ANY airport, and regardless of the security measures taken. Security was NEVER breached during this incident as the 'passenger'in question went through security. The question is how did he go past the boarding agent? We know by now that head counts are not obligatory on intra Schengen flights. The Question is how did he board the flight without a valid boarding pass? Maybe the one he found on the floor was to Malaga? and original holder of the boarding pass missed his flight!? If that is the case, no one is to blame.. we need to await the investigation, and hear the real story..until then everything is possible..

[sn26567]

To summarize how things are done at BRU:
1- access to the Schengen terminal in BRU requires only a valid boarding pass. It needn't even be on your name, nor does it have to be to the date, which explains the automated access system in use now.

The automated access system has securities built in it. I experienced myself that you cannot pass through it twice with the same boarding pass, nor can you pass on another date that the one printed on your boarding pass.

[teddybAIR]

This was bound to happen and it will happen again, with even greater consequences. This was even not a person with bad intentions! ID checks for travel within EU are not mandatory anymore. A passenger has the opportunity to ID himself, but passenger identification is not a standard practise anymore. My last flight, I was allowed on board and I only realised when I was in my seat that not at one single occasion I was asked to identify myself. Not at the check-in desk, not at the gates to enter Pier A, not at the boarding gate, nor upon entering the aircraft. I made the very disturbing conclusion that anyone could have carried my ticket and boarded the plane.

What the young boy proved is that the situation is even worse than what my experience thought me: apparently, it is even possible to board without a ticket! Can't say I'm surprised. Just follow an adult up close and they'll simply assume you are a family. I always wondered how super-human it was when someone holds +/- 4 boarding passes, is able to read them and simultaneously control whether indeed only 4 pax board the plane...

[b720]

yes, That is true.. however this is the whole idea behind Schengen, remember? Airlines need to know that the person on the plane has paid his/her fare and have gone through SECURITY!! a person with another boarding pass
(provided has gone through SECURITY) is actually cheating the airline!! he or she does not pose a security breach.. his/her only crime is that they have 'stolen' someone's ticket!!! A terrorist is interested in breaching the security check, he or she will buy a ticket!! In other words, as long as security check is tight, and IMPOSSIBLE to breach, then there is no problem.

[teddybAIR]

The problem is more serious than you think. How bout a decease on board without ID?

[b720]

the odds someone actually does board an aircraft 'without' an ID!! and the odds that that person actually dies during the flight? Guys, this is beginning to sound absurd.. just think about the hassle if we have more and more checks!! One of the fundamental ideas behind the creation of the EEC, SCHENGEN, EU etc is freedom of movement.. millions move every week ..some almost on a daily basis.. Security is paramount, ID check is not! Someone without an identity might die on a bus, or train travelling from one country (within the Schengen zone) to another.. as long as that person is not carrying explosives, the whole issue does not deserve much attention.. to return to that kid.. I am more worried about him travelling (alone) from his school in UKKEL to the airport!!

[A330]

I agree, security is about checking nobody is carrying items into the terminal (airside) that are not allowed, dangerous etc. They do not check ID or boarding pass. Though a 12 year old boy on his own should raise some questions. Not that is not allowed, but just to make sure where the kid is heading.
About head counts and checking ID on board. I think everything that happens at the gate (=boarding), prior to going into the jetbridge, is about making sure who can or cannot go on board (valid boarding pass), if everyone is accounted for, and so on. Checking your ID (passport or other document) to see if it is indeed your name on the ticket should also be done here. I find it strange if they have to check documents again once on board, as I have the feeling they just did that before at the gate. To me, that is what the gate is all about.
You used to get your boarding pass when checking in at the counter. However, with self check-in, or online check-in, the airline has less control on that process, and there is more room for something to go wrong.

[teddybAIR]

Yeah you're right...the fact that a probability of occurance is low is a good reason not to investigate a given problem. That's the way it has always been in aviation and that's probably how we arrived at the current safety levels, right? I can think of a few reasons - albeit that they will not occur daily - where it is a problem that the person on the flight is not identifiable:

> The Tokyo Agreement defined the roles & responsibilities of airlines and their captains towards people committing a criminal act on board an aircraft. It is the agreement on which a captain relies to deboard a drunk passenger whom he reasonably suspects is going to be a hazard/nuissance to normal flight ops. Now try to reclaim your incurred damage/loss with a passenger at FL330 that you cannot identify
> Let's hope it never has to happen, but in case of a crash it would be rather disturbing having to inform a family about their deceased relative if the person was not 100% sure on board

I agree with you that the important thing to prevent on an airline is a criminal offense. Now, we all know that security is not water tight or that impossible to breach and that the world of aviation was, is and will remain an appealing target thanks to her visibility and impact on public opinion worldwide. Knowing this, I would rather be able to identify anyone who has 'dubious' intentions. Not necessarily for the act of identifying, but rather for the demotivating aspects of positive identification.

Anyway, I will probably simply need to get used to this new procedure, but I must admit that I felt slightly less comfortable knowing that I got on the airplane unidentified. Maybe not a completely rational feeling, but I'm quite convinced I am not the only one feeling that way.

[KriVa]

Just to clarify my previous statement:
All I said was that Headcounts are not mandatory according to JAF SOPs. This doesn't mean a Headcount is not allowed.

But until we know what really happened, we could blame anyone really. In any case, don't underestimate the imagination and improvisation abbilities of a twelve year old

[teddybAIR]

Lack of positive identification means one cannot positively ID someone as an adult. This poses particular problems to the age groups close to 18y. What it concretely means is that any minor who can pass for an adult is able to 'dissappear' on a Schengen flight.

Now, all I'm saying is that the above examples are - IMHO - sufficient grounds to question certain policies and at least have a second look at them. But I'm quite convinced that that is exactly what is happening now.