Facing page: Active millimetre wave imaging using L-3
technology.
Right: An airport installation of CEIA archway metal
detectors.
that can be deployed to screen pas-
sengers. Some are more revealing than
others, both pictorially and in detec-
tion capability, and others have health
considerations, real or perceived, that
need to be addressed.
The main imaging technology
contenders for immediate deployment
to reveal metallic and non-metallic threat
items concealed beneath the clothing are
based on either millimetre wave imaging,
or backscatter X-ray or transmission
X-ray. Should we try to screen 100%
of passengers using any one of these
solutions, the passenger throughput
time will dramatically increase and the
potential for even longer queues to
develop within our airport terminals, backscatter X-ray (depending on solutions where passengers are unaware
which present the terrorist with a new whether it is a single-sided or dual- as to which of the technologies they
target to focus on, will be a given rather sided scanner) costs anywhere between will be screened by; in other words,
than a possibility. Furthermore, the cost $100,000 and $200,000 per unit and unpredictable security.
of the security checkpoint will rocket. transmission X-ray in excess of $200,000. Come what may, until we can deploy
If we were to attain a higher degree of Consider too that, with a slower stand-off screening of passengers on the
security in the skies as a result, perhaps passenger throughput rate, even more move, we need to ensure that we process
the investment would be worthwhile, systems are required. passengers effectively and speedily and
yet subjecting all passengers, or even Using very crude mathematical enable them to spend their airport time
all passengers on a given route, to a analysis, an airport security checkpoint (and money) in retail outlets rather than
standardised screening process that equipped with 20 archway metal in pointless queues. This means that,
attempts to identify explosives concealed detectors, unrealistically each processing rather than sounding the death knell of
in the post-Abdulmutallab era
on the body is an expensive investment, 500 passengers per hour (with no the metal detector, we need to strive
proffering limited returns. carry-on baggage), would cost around for even more to be deployed, only of
The current archway metal detector’s $220,000 to establish. To process that better quality offering low nuisance alarm
throughput rate is realistically not limited same 10,000 passengers, one would rates. After all, these devices are able
by the archway itself, but rather by the need around 50 backscatter X-ray or to automatically detect metal threats in
X-ray machines used to screen carry-on millimetre wave systems (let alone the every position on the body - including
baggage. Passengers are regularly asked space for them), which would cost $7.5 those that have been ingested or are
to wait due to a build-up of such bags million. Or, for transmission X-ray, 67 concealed in body cavities.
awaiting threat resolution. Were carry- machines, costing almost $15 million!
on baggage not permissible, according This doesn’t mean we should abandon “...rather than sounding
to CEIA, their systems can process 500 these emerging technologies as being
passengers per hour. Compare this cost-prohibitive and resign ourselves the death knell of the
with backscatter X-ray and millimetre to sticking exclusively with the reliable
wave solutions processing around 200 (for metal detection) archways we have metal detector, we need
passengers per hour and transmission come to know and love. What it does
X-ray around 150 per hour. mean is that we have to use the full to strive for even more
When it comes to price, the impact gambit of technologies available to
is all the more significant. Archway us and use different technologies to to be deployed, only of
metal detectors can be supplied to screen different passengers based on
airports at prices, depending on options a risk assessment of passengers made better quality offering
and configurations, ranging between by trained screeners. Failing that, at
$5,000 and $20,000 each. Millimetre the very least, we should be aiming for low nuisance alarm
wave technology on the other hand a security checkpoint that is equipped
costs around $150,000 per unit, whilst with a broad range of screening rates...”
February 2010 Aviationsecurityinternational www.asi-mag.com 13
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70