Airport watch - Adelaide trial

[Bob C]

Whilst browsing through a few sites this morning I found this
interesting piece of information on http://www.5dme.net/

"......Airport Watch - Adelaide Trial


19th April 2010. Today 5DME attended the launch of a Neigbourhood
Watch style scheme called AIRPORT WATCH which is to be trialled at
Adelaide Airport. The programme involves airport staff, airlines,
crews, retailers and others operating from airport grounds
participating by reporting suspicious activity.

The OTS (Office of Transport Safety) in collaboration with the
Australian Federal Police, SA Police and AAL have developed the
scheme. Adelaide Airport has stepped forward to be the trial host.

Adelaide Airport on any given day has 10,000 staff/workers in
attendance from the various operators, contractors and services.
That's 10,000 pairs of ears & eyes that could possibly report out-of-
the ordinary activities.

Airport Watch seeks to strengthen the security culture by involving
the airport community. Incidents that might usually go unreported
might now be reported due to the awareness Airport Watch will bring to
the aviation community.

The idea being: If you see something suspicious, REPORT IT.

If you see something suspicious you are urged to call 131 AFP (131
237)

A point to remember:

What makes a person suspicious is not the colour of their skin, their
ethnic culture, or their gender. It is what they do, where they are,
how they are behaving.

Once the trial is completed Airport Watch is likely to be introduced
at a number of Australian airports........"

It's interesting to note that only those working at the airport appear
to be involved and I wonder how widely " suspicious activity" will be
defined. No mention made of visitors to the airport being involved.

And I would have thought that it went without saying that anybody
working at an airport would have the sense to report any suspicious
activity long before now and even PRIOR to September 11.

It will be interesting to see how this develops across the country.

[Bob C]

I wonder if spotters and enthusiasts might be considered as " others operating from airport grounds" ?

And what would be "out-of-the ordinary activities"?

Surely not lawful photography as there are 4,184,578 photos on the three largest websites nor rego spotting which has been happening for many years.

But Joe Public has probably been seduced by various ads and TV shows so I expect those of us wandering around airports with cameras will be "chatted" at some time.

[Ray P.]

Great, there's 10000 more chances of being picked up because undoubtably airport workers will think that people who take photos of aircraft are suspicious (or just plain wierd).

[David Wilkie]

Originally Posted by Ray P.

airport workers will think that people who take photos of aircraft are suspicious (or just plain wierd).

We are weird

[Lee G]

Just looked at the 5DME website which this is featured on. The worrying thing I saw was in the video footage - point two on the poster which is shown states -

"Is the person RECORDING or TAKING photos in and around sensitive areas of your airport?

Terrorists place high value on video and photographic surveillance when planning an attack"

Shown at 53 second mark of video.

Maybe all the vetted spotters and photographers should be allowed a spot inside the boundary fence as well - that way the genuine bad guys are easily identifiable!

[Philip Argy]

I'm not sure it follows that standing on Shep's Mound or at the beach taking pics of aircraft is the same as taking pics of airport public areas. Aircraft spotting is a universal phenomenon that I would expect to be accommodated, even if occasionally we might get questioned to verify bona fides.

But taking pics of buildings and infrastructure is not quite as usual I'd have thought, and that's what is more likely to arouse suspicion.

[Bob C]

I agree with Philip that taking photos of fuel dumps, hangars, fences, buildings etc is out of the norm and is sure to raise suspicion, quite rightly.

However, as Philip mentioned, gatherings at such well known areas as Shep's Mound or the Beach should certainly be accommodated and be respected by the authorities.

Over here in Perth, WAC has recognised the value of genuine spotters and others who are interested in aircraft by agreeing to build a dedicated spotters area on the approach to Runway 03 as part of "Perth Airport Vision For The Future". Hopefully, this area will open in November.

Perhaps an easy solution would be for all airports to provide dedicated spotters/viewing areas.

[Joseph Saragozza.]

it would be nice if MEL dedicated spotters/viewing areas other than the one on operations rd.
who knows why the closed the observation deck years ago.

[Lee G]

Bob - you have the answer - up to a point. The dedicated area for spotters is great for spotters, but pretty lame for aviation photographers who look for different angles and perspectives on the subject. There are two spots on each side of the main runway in Sydney at present and all have been done to death or have limited viewing potential. The cross runway and third runway have a couple more viewing areas but they are not regularly used for larger aircraft.

As for a vetting process, the thread started by the AFP Officer on this forum is along the right lines - a process similar to a background check is conducted allowing viewing without the fear of being labeled "a bad guy because you have a camera with a big lens" or "a bad guy because you write down registrations and listen to an airband radio".

Chris - Regarding airside access remark - that was purely a tongue in cheek solution to the above.

Taking photos of the terminal building? - I took one yesterday - because it was lit up golden by the sun and had a number of aircraft parked around it - it looked absolutely fantastic, but in the grand scheme of things does that make me a "bad guy with intent" or "good guy trying to capture a unique image"?

[Nigel C]

Originally Posted by Lee G

but in the grand scheme of things does that make me a "bad guy with intent" or "good guy trying to capture a unique image"?

Mmmm...I'd say the first one.