You won't need a ticket to get to the Airmall (Pittsburgh: shop, airport)

[krogerDisco]

Originally Posted by RogersParkTransplant

That's really interesting -- do you mean in Pittsburgh specifically or at all airports?

Pittsburgh. Some even came out to the airport with their kids just to watch the airplanes. But with USAir not using it as a hub, takeoffs and landings are far less frequent.

[Enough_Already]

This is a bad idea for a number of different reasons.

First, the more people who have access to the secure part of the airport the more chance something or someone could get through security and result in a terrorist act. It is just a numbers thing. Mistakes happen and more people means more of a chance of a mistake.

Second, the vast majority of people are in the airport to travel. Having non-travelers there will make security lines longer. That is a big negative for the traveler.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

This is a bad idea for a number of different reasons.

First, the more people who have access to the secure part of the airport the more chance something or someone could get through security and result in a terrorist act. It is just a numbers thing. Mistakes happen and more people means more of a chance of a mistake.

Second, the vast majority of people are in the airport to travel. Having non-travelers there will make security lines longer. That is a big negative for the traveler.

You are right. There was an industry expert on the radio a day or so ago. He stated pretty much what you are stating. Hopefully, they gave thought this through.

[Johnny C]

This will bring in some higher sales due to family members wanting to send off their families from the gate or wait for them as they arrive. That's about it I would think. Ain't nobody gonna subject themselves to the awful TSA process just to buy a polo shirt at the PGA golf outlet and eat at TGIF.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

This is a bad idea for a number of different reasons.

First, the more people who have access to the secure part of the airport the more chance something or someone could get through security and result in a terrorist act. It is just a numbers thing. Mistakes happen and more people means more of a chance of a mistake.

Second, the vast majority of people are in the airport to travel. Having non-travelers there will make security lines longer. That is a big negative for the traveler.

I don't think a terrorist attack on the Pittsburgh airport (especially after going through security) is anymore likely then me winning the next powerball & to the other point, given relatively the low numbers of travelers in general at PIT I don't think a few extra people meeting their families at the gate will make any difference.

I welcome any policy that's at least somewhat of a pushback or return to normalcy on the ever increasing 'security' charade airports have done since 9/11

[Kippy]

So, you won't need a ticket to shop, but after January you'll need a passport unless they get the RealID thing sorted out?

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I don't think a terrorist attack on the Pittsburgh airport (especially after going through security) is anymore likely then me winning the next powerball & to the other point, given relatively the low numbers of travelers in general at PIT I don't think a few extra people meeting their families at the gate will make any difference.

I welcome any policy that's at least somewhat of a pushback or return to normalcy on the ever increasing 'security' charade airports have done since 9/11

No one can predict where terrorists will attack. They look for soft spots and this is now a soft spot. The gain of a few extra dollars in sales in a place whose purpose is transportation not retail does not outweigh the security issues, the additional wait time of the travelers, and the additional cost of screening these additional people.

Just think of the ramifications if a terrorist did successfully execute an attack at the Pittsburgh Airport. The number of passengers who use the airport would not reduce the impact of such an attack.

This is a case of little upside with a great deal of downside.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

No one can predict where terrorists will attack. They look for soft spots and this is now a soft spot. The gain of a few extra dollars in sales in a place whose purpose is transportation not retail does not outweigh the security issues, the additional wait time of the travelers, and the additional cost of screening these additional people.

Just think of the ramifications if a terrorist did successfully execute an attack at the Pittsburgh Airport. The number of passengers who use the airport would not reduce the impact of such an attack.

This is a case of little upside with a great deal of downside.

I'll take my chances that a terrorist isn't going to travel to Pittsburgh to get checked against the no fly list & go through normal airport security in order to attack people inside the landside terminal when there are thousands of easier targets to perpetuate terror upon.

[PITairport]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

No one can predict where terrorists will attack. They look for soft spots and this is now a soft spot. The gain of a few extra dollars in sales in a place whose purpose is transportation not retail does not outweigh the security issues, the additional wait time of the travelers, and the additional cost of screening these additional people.

Just think of the ramifications if a terrorist did successfully execute an attack at the Pittsburgh Airport. The number of passengers who use the airport would not reduce the impact of such an attack.

This is a case of little upside with a great deal of downside.

Recent terrorist attacks at airports (Moscow and Brussels for example) have been at the landside pre-security areas. At Pittsburgh I notice "meeters and greeters" congregate around the security area waiting for their arriving people to come through. Not only does this clog up an already small area but IMO produces a larger target for a hypothetical terrorist attack. Better to get these people through security to minimize both issues.

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I'll take my chances that a terrorist isn't going to travel to Pittsburgh to get checked against the no fly list & go through normal airport security in order to attack people inside the landside terminal when there are thousands of easier targets to perpetuate terror upon.

There were many targets much easier than 911. Pittsburgh airport just became easier and it will have longer security lines for very little gain.