Airport Puffer Devices Expensive And Don't Work Very Well, Being Phased Out

from the so-much-for-that-plan dept

Like many of you, I’m sure, I’ve had the “pleasure” of going through airport security in one of those newer “puffer” devices that shoot little puffs of air up and down your body. I was told that these were sophisticated new machines that are much better at finding traces of explosives on people. Except… it turns out… not so much. Apparently the machines are incredibly expensive, prone to breaking down when exposed to dirt and humidity (none of that around airports) and difficult to repair. So, the government is no longer going to roll out any more such machines. This reminds me that, just last year, we were wondering whatever happened to the predicted boom in new airport security technology, that everyone insisted was on the way following the attacks of September 11th. These machines were about the only visual example of any new technology… and they don’t seem to work.

Filed Under: ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Airport Puffer Devices Expensive And Don't Work Very Well, Being Phased Out”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
NSMike says:

Not really new...

These kinds of devices are not really new. They are standard at nuke plants, although of a different variety. Because the security stations at nuke plants are not as busy as airports, they can afford to use ones that take longer, and don’t use “puffs” of air. It’s a constant stream of air, and you must stand there for a while, roughly six or seven seconds. I don’t know how prone to breaking they were, but they were never out of order when I was there.

Beta says:

“Since 2005, maintaining the machines has cost the government more than $6 million.”

There you are, the machines were a $6M success for somebody.

The day the towers fell I said to my friends “mark my words, we’re going to get new security measures that infringe our civil rights, do no real good and make somebody a lot of money.”

Anonymous Coward says:

It'sprobably all psychological.

They often leave these machines open and I noticed that they have a canister of compressed air in it. There are standards for gas canister coloring, and the canisters are either blue and yellow so it was non-toxic, medical grade something being shot on you. Possibly medical CO2, a air mix, possibly even nitrous oxide.

When I walked thru these machines, I haven’t seen anything that would resemble a collector or sensor plate of sorts for the fumes, plus the way the nozzles shot around a person didn’t have a defined airstream. It seems the intent was more control of the airstream around the person. You’ll also note these units are usually located at either extreme of the airport lanes, where airflow within and around the machines is probably more controlled.

Pretty sure the whole existence of the machine was psychological.

Anonymous of Course says:

Re: It'sprobably all psychological.

No, it’s not. My former boss grabbed a box out of the
lab for packing up some show-and-tell stuff he was taking
on a flight. I got a call later that day from him, “You
got me in so much trouble…!” The box had once contained
jars of potassium nitrate used for a humidity controlled
cabinet. It set off the alarms and caused a minor panic.

Al Jazira says:

Something that works well in one situation may not work so well when adapted to a different one. Such is the case with these machines. The only actual way to tell whether they’ll work under airport conditions is to stick them in airports and try them. It isn’t that they don’t work (they do), they simply don’t work well enough under those conditions to justify the cost and extensive maintenance needed to keep them working. So someone in the government actually had a good idea and canceled the program, and folks are complaining?

90% of airport screening is purely psychological. If we REALLY wanted to be secure, the public AND the airlines would never stand for it. Look at all the whining about the extremely effective full body scanners currently being tested. The person who sees the images never sees the people, so unless you’ve got a 3rd leg or something, nobody’s going to know who you are, or care. Oh, but folks would rather not have their delicate sensibilities offended even if that means going down in a fiery ball of twisted metal.

I don’t know of a single airport in the country where maintenance workers, with full access to the entire terminal and the airplanes have to pass ANY sort of security. What are the odds of paying some minimum wage schlub who in most parts of the country isn’t even a US citizen to stick a package on a plane? Maybe hold his family hostage back in their home country for added incentive? And, of course, the guy (or girl) could just waltz in or out without anybody saying anything.

I know whereof I speak, I personally trained many of the TSA supervisors employed around the country (at least those hired in the TSA’s 1st year of existence).

Even El Al’s security is based mainly on appearances. The only airline operating on US soil that the TSA isn’t allowed to handle security for, we’re (or at least were) required to observe them, and their procedures are a joke. After screening the passengers luggage (at JFK), they hand the luggage back to the passengers to take up to the counter (on a long, densely packed line). The passengers at this point haven’t gone through ANY security screening, and someone with a bomb in their pocket could easily slip it inside their luggage after their luggage has been scanned.

Oh, and if you’re one of the goyim, expect to be selected for extra and in-depth screening, because you WILL get it. We can’t get away with that sort of profiling, but they can. Of course, even then they don’t follow correct procedure taking far too many samples before testing for explosives. Anything collected with their first swipe would likely be well worn off of their swab before it was ever tested.

ChurchHatesTucker (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“90% of airport screening is purely psychological. If we REALLY wanted to be secure, the public AND the airlines would never stand for it. “

B.S. The threat of 9/11 ended in a field in Pennsylvania. The promise of hijackers was always that the travelers would be unharmed, once that was belied (and while everyone else was just reacting, I will add) the previously passive sheep laid into the wolves.They died, of course, but they prevented any other casualities.

As I’ve said since 9/12: Issue Bowie Knives to everyone as they come onboard. After 9/11 you won’t get a chance to finish your polemic.

Beta says:

Al Jazira: “Look at all the whining about the extremely effective full body scanners currently being tested… folks would rather not have their delicate sensibilities offended even if that means going down in a fiery ball of twisted metal.

I have flown on commercial airliners many, many times without being scanned, and I have never, not even once, gone down in a fiery ball of twisted metal. Your risk estimation is way, way off.

Michael Goldberg (user link) says:

Airport Security

There are many more security devices out there; they are just being bought & installed at international airports. IDO Security has developed such a device called the MagShoe. The MagShoe is a metal detector device developed to make travel safer & more enjoyable; no need to remove shoes! For more info visit

All feedback is welcomed!


Smothers says:

New Security Devices

Thats the new generation of airport devices that are commercially available in countries other than the U.S.A.. Its produced by a small technology transfer company from Kentucky and beats backscatter technology due to the fact that the radiation penetrates through the body, allowing one to see inside body cavities etc.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...