Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Or people who still don't know you have to take off your shoes, or empty your pockets, or no "enhanced imaging". Just having a terminal with people who know what to do, and with fewer people period it will also be less of a headache.

In the end it's just rich people paying rich people prices to do rich people things and get rich people services. It's a general aviation terminal, albeit a nice one, and f that pisses people off the problems really is an internal problem.

 Peregrine wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
And that "knowledge" utterly failed you in this case, as evidenced by your incorrect statement, so where does that leave you?

My statement was correct. You will not just walk right out to your plane, you're paying $7500/year plus $2000/flight for the privilege of going through a private TSA line where you have the exact same security as everyone else. The original article presented blatant marketing hype, as if the new service will bypass all of the inconveniences of airline travel instead of just cutting the lines a bit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a quote from the OP:

I didn’t have to deal with the usual crush of airport traffic, or people, or security headaches.

That is blatant marketing hype because you will have to deal with security, unless you have a private/chartered plane. You will have the exact same security as every other passenger, you just pay $2000 per flight to have a shorter line to wait in. It's not going to be like having a private plane, where you can literally walk through the door with a bag full of unsecured guns and toss them in the back of your plane.

As you've deflected all over and dodged to admit your mistake, allow me to refresh you with the comment you made and to which I responded.

BigWaagh wrote:
"Where does it say that this is only available to individuals with a chartered/company plane?"

Peregrine wrote:
"The part where it mentions things like having a private car drive up to your plane to get you. This would be in direct violation of FAA rules about airport security, where the airline sections of the airport are divided off into a secure area with strictly limited access. If they do give access to airline flights then the article is marketing fluff that conveniently fails to mention that you'll be going through the exact same security measures as all of the other passengers, even if you have a private security checkpoint with shorter lines."

YOU ARE WRONG. As in not right. This is not, I repeat NOT, a service exclusively available to individuals with a chartered/company plane. If you can debate that, without the that whole silly steps nonsense, please do. You said it's only for "individuals with a chartered/company plane." I said you're wrong. I await with eager anticipation your address to that statement.

 Peregrine wrote:


I didn’t have to deal with the usual crush of airport traffic, or people, or security headaches.

That is blatant marketing hype because you will have to deal with security, unless you have a private/chartered plane. You will have the exact same security as every other passenger, you just pay $2000 per flight to have a shorter line to wait in. It's not going to be like having a private plane, where you can literally walk through the door with a bag full of unsecured guns and toss them in the back of your plane.

It is also imprecise writing. The author isn't directly stating that security was avoided. The term "security headaches" can be interpreted in a lot of ways.

Such as:

 feeder wrote:
Maybe "security headaches" refers to the fact that there is a 100% chance you won't get "randomly" selected (for further screening), even if you are a brown skinned guy.

(edit)

And:

 d-usa wrote:
Or people who still don't know you have to take off your shoes, or empty your pockets, or no "enhanced imaging". Just having a terminal with people who know what to do, and with fewer people period it will also be less of a headache.

Oh FFS, the service as described in the OP is only available to private/chartered planes, because bypassing security like that is only available outside of the heavily-secured airline areas. Obviously the way that they're going to keep their marketing promises about letting airline passengers buy the service is that the description in the OP was incredibly misleading. You aren't just going to walk straight to your plane like if you have a company jet, you're going to go through the exact same security as everyone else. And even then I have my doubts, since the location shown in the other article requires driving through unsecured areas to get from the private terminal to the airline gate, a massive hole in security. Imagine how easy it would be to have that car stop somewhere along the way, pick up guns/bombs/whatever, and then continue on to the plane with no further security checks. Even if it was approved for the moment it's the kind of thing that is likely to get reviewed and shut down.

And the bit about steps is hardly "nonsense" when it's a bragging point in the original marketing hype article.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
Or people who still don't know you have to take off your shoes, or empty your pockets, or no "enhanced imaging".

If the enhanced imaging/extra checks/etc aren't performed there then it's a massive security hole to be exploited. Essentially you're telling the bad guys that they can pay $10,000 to guarantee lighter security, and the problem there should be obvious.

I don't actually care if you're right or wrong. But keep it civil.

Many terminals have special 1st class TSA lines where they only have metal detectors, meaning you can already avoid the useless security theater for the cost of a 1st class ticket at many airports in the USA.

The next terrorist will attack for the cost of no tickets and simply blow himself up while standing in the crowded security line with everybody else who isn't wearing shoes and holding their pants up. They don't need a ticket to stand in line there, and we hand them a crowd to kill on a silver platter.

Pretending this is some new security hole to exploit is silly, it already exists at most airports anyway.

Just say "I'm pissed rich people can spend their money on a nicer life where they don't have to interact with poor people" and let it be at that.

 Peregrine wrote:
Oh FFS, the service as described in the OP is only available to private/chartered planes, because bypassing security like that is only available outside of the heavily-secured airline areas. Obviously the way that they're going to keep their marketing promises about letting airline passengers buy the service is that the description in the OP was incredibly misleading. You aren't just going to walk straight to your plane like if you have a company jet, you're going to go through the exact same security as everyone else. And even then I have my doubts, since the location shown in the other article requires driving through unsecured areas to get from the private terminal to the airline gate, a massive hole in security. Imagine how easy it would be to have that car stop somewhere along the way, pick up guns/bombs/whatever, and then continue on to the plane with no further security checks. Even if it was approved for the moment it's the kind of thing that is likely to get reviewed and shut down.

And the bit about steps is hardly "nonsense" when it's a bragging point in the original marketing hype article.

For giggles, I took the down time awaiting your response and made a phone call. I just got off the phone with TSA at LAX and this is all a go, appears that it will open as scheduled and is as advertised. But, you know, steps.

You're right on one part of your statement. You won't be able to walk straight to your plane, you'll get chauffeured to it in a BMW sedan. Sounds like less steps, actually.

So some say security risk?

7.5k per anum..
2k per flight
X k per ticket/ private flight.
Plus x cost to make them look part for the act.

Umm that's going to be a very expensive start up cost for any would be terrorist. 10k + 15k or even higher...

Plus most recent attacks hit thr outer security areas, before thr TSA lines... Thr outer terminal. It was same in France, Brussels, and such.

I don,t see this as a particular security hole at end of day.

You people love to argue in the internet about everything

 Galas wrote:
You people love to argue in the internet about everything

What else is it for bar cat pictures, other things and memes lol?

 Galas wrote:
You people love to argue in the internet about everything

You're wrong! Perdoname, amigo, fue un chiste!

 Spinner wrote:
It's the free market in action. Luxury services for luxury prices, and apparently the cost of government employees is being reimbursed.

I mean, it's an ostentatious display of wealth, but we don't seem to have issues with that as a country.

This.


While it may seem extravagant (God forbid that the Hollyweird court jesters and other big money types be inconvenienced [sarcasm.jpg]), you're absolutely right. Somebody saw a market and tapped into it. Nothing more. And the fact that any government costs (i.e. TSA) are being reimbursed only sweetens the deal and eliminates any issues on the taxpayer front.


It's kinda silly. But no real harm is being done (or taxpayer money wasted).

Again though, I don't see anyone having a problem with the terminal specifically.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Again though, I don't see anyone having a problem with the terminal specifically.

Aye, ita going to have a few thousand users tops.
There's a pretty small pool who can afford 2k a flight special lounges, or 4.5k with guests.

Normal people are now entertainment.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/12/lax-private-terminal-rich-people-celebrities

Okay, now that, I have a problem with.

They should at least give them little bags of peanuts they can throw at the rest of us if we're going down this route.

I wouldn't like that too much if I were in LAX right now.



I'm not a fish in an aquarium, goddamn it!