Baha is correct in that fewer bad things should get through -- in fact, I am tempted to put something like this on my final exam in Finite Math. The real question is whether this is the best use of resources. If the gate checks catch very few additional problems, maybe it might make sense to put additional screeners out at the entry to the concourse and reduce the time the pax stand in line outside security. If the gate checks are catching a significant amount of problems, then it may be worth having them, but then David's point needs to be taken -- what's going wrong up front (or at some other airport)? In other words, someone at TSA or FAA needs to do a serious study of this. "Data, I must have data" is what Sherlock Holmes said. john On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Bahadir Acuner wrote: > It's not an issue of doing it right, but it's an issue of statistics. > If you do two levels of security there will be less errors, becuase > believe it or not people miss things at the first times. > Wife caught two people last night, thanks to the gate check. One > with a swiss army knife and another one with a steak knife.. > > The surprising thing is public still gets pissed off to the screeners > when these things are taken away at the gate.. > > BAHA ACUNER - CFI,CFII,MEI > > www.bahadiracuner.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU]On Behalf Of > David Ross > Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 12:07 PM > To: AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU > Subject: Re: Gate check-in being phased out (via PS Inform) > > > If they did the security check correctly the first time, there would be no > need for a second check > > David Ross > http://home.attbi.com/~damiross/ > -- John F. Kurtzke, C.S.C. Department of Mathematics 278 Buckley Center University of Portland Portland, OR 97203 503-943-7377 kurtzke@up.edu