Bicycle and airport security

[Tbgibb]

My wife and I recently traveled by air with our bikes. Both have S&S couplings and are almost
identical. The components are somewhat different but the biggest difference between them is that
hers has a Terry Butterfly saddle and mine has a Brooks B-17. In the Philladelphia airport mine was
tagged for some additional search. The additional search that we saw involved wiping down the
handles and analysing the pad with which they did the wiping (gas chromatograph? mass spec?). After
it apparently passed that test an additional sticker was put on and the case went on the belt to (I
thought) head for the plane. When we got home I found that the zip tie that I had put on the lock
hasp on the case was gone (while my wife's case still had it's zip tie). The bike did not appear to
have been repacked but I suspect that it was opened. I have a large note inside asking to please
have me paged if it is necessary to remove the contents so I can supervise the re-packing, but I was
not paged.

Since we have been warned that food can produce a false positive in the explosive detection
equipment I wonder if the oils in the Brooks saddle might do the same thing. Does anyone have any
knowledge of this?

I had no containers of oil or grease in either case and my chain is "drier" than hers. I do have to
remove my right side crank, exposing some grease on the taper, but most grease was wiped off.

I want to figure out what might have caused the false alarm so I can avoid having some inspector
trying to jam the bike back into the case (with or without my input).

Tom Gibb <[email protected]

 

[Fred Roses]

[email protected] (TBGibb) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
<snip>
>
> I want to figure out what might have caused the false alarm so I can avoid having some inspector
> trying to jam the bike back into the case (with or without my input).

My B17-saddled S&S bike just travelled from Boston to Dublin to Galway to Frankfurt to Tokyo to Hong
Kong to Las Vegas to Providence...whew! It was well-lubed and the box contained both Prolink and a
tube of Phils. It was opened only one time - in Galway - and the inspector seemed only concerned
about CO2 inflators. In Tokyo the inspector asked me if I had deflated the tires (I have read that
the hazard of inflated tires is an old myth).

I believe there is a lot variation in inspections from person to person and airport to airport, and
I'd bet your inspection was just the luck of the draw. For me it went smoothly, quite a relief as I
did dread the prospect of constant inspections, as anybody would who knows how tightly the bike fits
into the hard-case. By the way, I have found that it's *much* easier to repack the bike successfully
if you remove the tire from the top wheel. Hope this is helpful...

Fred

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (TBGibb) wrote:

> I want to figure out what might have caused the false alarm so I can avoid having some inspector
> trying to jam the bike back into the case (with or without my input).

Probably your case was chosen as a random sample. Inspection of baggage is SOP since 9/11, but only
a portion of the bags are examined. Probably any bag which shows hard objects on X-ray such as
tubes, wires, etc is a candidate (compared to a bag that shows only clothing). Bikes may also
trigger a specific investigation for CO2 cartridges, volatile substances, etc.

When I flew to France in August, my bag was inspected and a note to that effect was left inside the
bag. As well, the zipper pulls had been zip tied shut by the inspector.

 

[Mike Jacoubowsk]

> I want to figure out what might have caused the false alarm so I can avoid having some inspector
> trying to jam the bike back into the case (with or without my input).

I spent quite a bit of time at CDG (Paris) airport on the way home from the TDF, and trust me, there
was *no* rhyme or reason to why they'd choose to inspect one bike closely and not another. My bike
had probably the largest case of any there, and thus (I'd think) the easiest to hide something in,
and yet it wasn't opened up in either direction.

And, as in your situation, I saw couples with identical bike cases, only one of which was subject
to an extraordinarily-thorough search (the sort where you'd be much less embarrassed had you
washed your cycling clothing before coming home). Mind you, this was done out in the open, in
front of everyone. Trust me, for some people they'd have been better off if it had been done out
of sight! :>)

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"TBGibb" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> My wife and I recently traveled by air with our bikes. Both have S&S
couplings
> and are almost identical. The components are somewhat different but the biggest difference between
> them is that hers has a Terry Butterfly saddle
and
> mine has a Brooks B-17. In the Philladelphia airport mine was tagged for
some
> additional search. The additional search that we saw involved wiping down
the
> handles and analysing the pad with which they did the wiping (gas chromatograph? mass spec?).
> After it apparently passed that test an additional sticker was put on and the case went on the
> belt to (I thought)
head
> for the plane. When we got home I found that the zip tie that I had put
on the
> lock hasp on the case was gone (while my wife's case still had it's zip
tie).
> The bike did not appear to have been repacked but I suspect that it was
opened.
> I have a large note inside asking to please have me paged if it is
necessary
> to remove the contents so I can supervise the re-packing, but I was not
paged.
>
>
> Since we have been warned that food can produce a false positive in the explosive detection
> equipment I wonder if the oils in the Brooks saddle
might
> do the same thing. Does anyone have any knowledge of this?
>
> I had no containers of oil or grease in either case and my chain is
"drier"
> than hers. I do have to remove my right side crank, exposing some grease
on
> the taper, but most grease was wiped off.
>
> I want to figure out what might have caused the false alarm so I can avoid having some inspector
> trying to jam the bike back into the case (with or without my input).
>
> Tom Gibb <[email protected]

 

[Mike Jacoubowsk]

> In Tokyo the inspector asked me if I had deflated the tires (I have read that the hazard of
> inflated tires is an old myth).

The main reason for requiring deflated tires is to check for anything that might be hidden in them,
or at least that's what one security guard told me (and I don't think he was the sort that had any
idea there would be an issue from pressure changes).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

 

[David Damerell]

Mike Jacoubowsky <[email protected]> wrote:
>The main reason for requiring deflated tires is to check for anything that might be hidden in them,
>or at least that's what one security guard told me

I suspect he made that up - consider how much stuff you could hide in the rim bed, inside the
seatpost, inside the handlebars as recommended by Richard Ballantine...
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[Mike Jacoubowsk]

> I suspect he made that up - consider how much stuff you could hide in the rim bed, inside the
> seatpost, inside the handlebars as recommended by Richard Ballantine...

They *did* check handlebars. They had some clue as to what a bike was; I got the idea they have
people whose main job is to harass people with bikes.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"David Damerell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:+aD*[email protected]...
> Mike Jacoubowsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> >The main reason for requiring deflated tires is to check for anything
that
> >might be hidden in them, or at least that's what one security guard told
me
>
> I suspect he made that up - consider how much stuff you could hide in the rim bed, inside the
> seatpost, inside the handlebars as recommended by Richard Ballantine...
> --
> David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[David Damerell]

Mike Jacoubowsky <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I suspect he made that up - consider how much stuff you could hide in the rim bed, inside the
>>seatpost, inside the handlebars as recommended by Richard Ballantine...
>They *did* check handlebars.

Yes; I wouldn't pick the handlebars, given that it's been so publicly recommended. I think the best
place to smuggle something inside a bike would be somewhere that required complicated reassembly
afterwards - how about in the BB shell with a cup-and-cone bottom bracket assembly?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[Chris Zacho "Th]

Good question. Leather is an "organic" material. It is possible it (or the oil/proofide) set
something off.

Then again. it may have just been selected in a standard "random" search.

May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear for the hills! Chris

Chris'Z Corner "The Website for the Common Bicyclist": http://www.geocities.com/czcorner