Blast Containment: holding back Hell’s dragons
With improved passenger screening making it harder for terrorists to penetrate airside zones and infiltrate devices on board aircraft, the threat of bomb attacks against airport terminals has increased. The high profile attack on Glasgow airport in July 2007 turned the world’s attention to this terrorist modus operandi. Andy Oppenheimer outlines the various countermeasures to protect life and infrastructure at airports from explosive devices
ritical infrastructure protection (CIP) has become a priority in anti-terrorist countermeasures. It includes practical measures such as improving the design of buildings to make it harder for them to be blown up and, if they are, building in design features which will limit damage to life, limb and property. The threat of an improvised explosive device (IED), or multiple devices, exploding within an airport has long been factored into security arrangements.
C
When an IED is identified, various measures must be applied immediately to prevent it from detonating or, in the event that it does, by containing the effects of the blast, including its deafening sound, resultant fire and potentially lethal flying fragments. Also, an unresolved item detected in screening must be safely removed and, in a crowded area such as an airport terminal, would need to be contained for Explosives Ordnance Disposal (EOD) to take place. There have been many examples of bomb scares at airports where
22
evacuation was necessary. Just one such incident only lasting for one to two hours can cost millions of dollars, due to the evacuation of passengers, airport staff and aircrew, the time required to deal with the suspect device, missed flights by passengers, out-of-hours aircrew and their replacement and the diversion of flights and cancellation of others.
Isolation units enable the airport
to respond immediately, reducing the need to carry out procedures such as ICE - Isolate, Cordon and Evacuate - thus enabling the airport to continue operating rather than face costly, disruptive and potentially dangerous evacuations. Technologies for bomb containment are designed to protect everyone using the facility and surrounding area, as well as the buildings and assets themselves, from IED attacks. EOD resolution is all about keeping airports open, and enabling business and traffic to continue without delays, logjams and panic. The aim
Register now for FREE instant access to ASI online by visiting
www.asi-mag.com
is to evacuate the problem object, rather than the airport or facility.
Bomb Containment: Thinking Inside the Box
Mitigating suspect devices in bag- gage involves stationing blast con- tainment equipment by the X-ray screening point rather than having it towed in after evacuation. Security staff then can, if necessary, easily remove the item causing concern within the container - which is like a big box or giant wheelie bin or trolley - for resolution elsewhere. Removing a wholly unexploded or partially exploded device or intact explosive may also provide vital evi- dence about the device and who made it and where the components originated, let alone save lives. Containment may be carried out by several types of vessels. First, containment vessels for suspect luggage are commonly deployed at airport passenger and baggage areas to seal off suspect luggage after screening until explosives ordnance
June 2010 Aviationsecurityinternational
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