Unattended bags

[jon0844]

I've never heard this before, do you have any further details? I usually travel light with just a small rucksack that can fit under my seat etc. but when I do have a large bag I often place it (unlabelled) on the end of carriage racks. I could do with knowing if I should label it.

Sorry, meant to say abroad. SNCF had notices and signs, and I believe Eurostar asks too. Not that they are that proactive in enforcing it as far as I can see.

Eurostar is obviously forced reservations but I am not sure every operator that asks for bags to be labelled requires the owner to be in a seat?

 

[swaldman]

It may be true that MI5 say the current level is "severe" but if you have a look at the link below, you'll see that even though there are 5 different levels, the bottom two have never been used and the threat has either been "substantial", "severe" or "critical" ever since the information was first published. This is despite the fact that between 2006 and 2016 there were no significant terrorist attacks in the UK. Little wonder so many of us reckon that MI5 are crying wolf.

A cynic - or a pragmatist - might point out that nobody is going to lose their job for deciding to play it safe and not reduce the threat level. But if somebody decides on a reduction and there's an attack the next day, they might be in trouble.

This post, talking about America in 2004, is relevant. In it the UK is praised as not having gone in for sillyness like, well, exactly the sort of alert level scale that we later went in for and that this thread is talking about.

 

[Taunton]

Unfortunately, ever since the "Threat Level" got tied to the level of government funds made available for such matters, there is a perverse incentive for those in the security industry (and it very much is an industry nowadays) to maintain the level as high as they can get away with, to justify their departments and staff.

This is to take nothing away from the very competent staff who actually identify, penetrate and break up potential threats, who we are all indebted to. But there is also now a huge bureaucratic tail of managers at various levels, PR people, Whitehall mandarins, suppliers of systems which may or may not be useful, lobbyists for said suppliers, and such like, who would be first to go should budgets be reduced.

 

[Mathew S]

This is despite the fact that between 2006 and 2016 there were no significant terrorist attacks in the UK.

That's only the case BECAUSE of the work of the security services, the vigilance of members of the public, and the strategies in place to mitigate the threat (such as the ones already discussed here, which includes being suspicious about unattended luggage). You're right that there were no successful attacks in that period, but there were many unsuccessful ones.

 

[johnkingeu]

I work far a major UK quoted company, not in the travel business, which does have staff travelling regularly including abroad.

We get regular training sessions on "Run, Hide, Tell" and one thing that is emphasised is never, ever use headphones, especially noise cancelling ones, to the extent that you cannot hear what is going on around you. I have a set of over ear headphones that I used to use, having sat through the training I never use them now except at home.

You shouldn’t use noise cancelling headphone because of...terrorists? Now I’ve heard everything!

 

[Hartington]

A few years ago I was waiting for a flight in a US airport. A plane pulled up in front of where I was sitting and I took some photos. A little while later a gentleman in pilot uniform came up and I asked why I was photographing "his" plane. "I like planes" was my reply which he accepted. I was initially a little taken aback but, in retrospect, I decided I could understand why the question has been asked.

I get frustrated by all the announcements; not just those about bags but all of them. The problem is that people don't listen, forget the fact that some are listening to "tunes" some people simply don't listen. I live near Castle Cary and I have had occasion to pull a lady back from the edge of a platform (not just a little over the yellow line, on the edge) as an HST entered the platform at speed. I suppose you could argue people get inured to the announcements but that implies they've heard them so why do they fail to act on what they've stopped listening to?

It may be the case that the "security services" manage to stop many attacks but why should that stop the rest of us "doing our bit"? Don't make life difficult for the people trying to keep us safe, don't stand right on the edge of the platform, stay near your baggage and if staff seem to be getting interested help them identify yourself and your bags, put the parking break on your buggy. And if some people aren't listening keep telling them - who knows, one day they might just get the message.

 

[Busaholic]

Unattended luggage has been a security concern since the IRA campaign started in earnest in mainland Britain in the early 1970s, and even though it may not be part of the tactics of most I.S. operatives/sympathisers there are other groups or individuals who will still use such crude devices to further their dastardly ends. For instance, there was the neo-Nazi psychopath known as the Nail Bomber who left bombs in Soho and Brixton that caused death and serious injuries back at the turn of the century, and it's well known that the Far Right are on the rise again and planning further deadly attacks.

 

[johnkingeu]

Unattended luggage has been a security concern since the IRA campaign started in earnest in mainland Britain in the early 1970s, and even though it may not be part of the tactics of most I.S. operatives/sympathisers there are other groups or individuals who will still use such crude devices to further their dastardly ends.

It’s not so much that people are denying that there is any threat to the railway, clearly there is, although (despite the current ‘threat level’) it is actually much lower than when the IRA did their bombing campaign targeted at rail stations and lines, when there was no published threat level. It is more that, in the absence of any public evidence (from criminal trials, warnings, leaks on Twitter) of any lives being saved by prompt action by railway staff or the public, we should probably refrain from panicking at the sight of unattended luggage.

In fact the HOT protocol is rather sensible and pragmatic:

1. Think unattended luggage might be a bomb?
2. Check if it is really a bomb (has it been hidden? has it got wires sticking out)
3. Do something about it.

I’m paraphrasing a bit, but clearly the protocol was written by someone who realises that either (a) it was a viable and working bomb and you are dead by now or (b) it is a viable but faulty bomb and isn’t going to explode any time soon or (c) it is someone’s sports kit and they will be along to collect it shortly.

 

[Mathew S]

You shouldn’t use noise cancelling headphone because of...terrorists? Now I’ve heard everything!

I get the impression that RichE's employment is such that there are particular hazards and risks involved which might well not apply to the majority of the population. I take the same precaution when I'm out and about in certain places (eg. travelling into/home from work at bizarre hours, in the dark, by myself) but whether it's a worthwhile precaution will vary from person to person.

Certainly it's true that anti-terrorist training (I've done some for where I work, but also specialist hostile environments training) changes the way you view threats, as well as making you think about some of the simple things you can do to keep yourself, and others, as safe as possible.

 

[mpthomson]

Unfortunately, ever since the "Threat Level" got tied to the level of government funds made available for such matters, there is a perverse incentive for those in the security industry (and it very much is an industry nowadays) to maintain the level as high as they can get away with, to justify their departments and staff.

This is to take nothing away from the very competent staff who actually identify, penetrate and break up potential threats, who we are all indebted to. But there is also now a huge bureaucratic tail of managers at various levels, PR people, Whitehall mandarins, suppliers of systems which may or may not be useful, lobbyists for said suppliers, and such like, who would be first to go should budgets be reduced.

Simply no. That's not the way it works in this particular area. Every department of government wants more funds, but no risks are being exaggerated.

 

[mpthomson]

I’m paraphrasing a bit, but clearly the protocol was written by someone who realises that either (a) it was a viable and working bomb and you are dead by now or (b) it is a viable but faulty bomb and isn’t going to explode any time soon or (c) it is someone’s sports kit and they will be along to collect it shortly.

Wrong and that's an incredibly dangerous assumption to make.

 

[johnkingeu]

I take the same precaution when I'm out and about in certain places (eg. travelling into/home from work at bizarre hours, in the dark, by myself)

I thought terrorists tended to attack crowded places? You are saying that when you are walking home alone at night you don’t wear headphones because you are worried about being attacked by terrorists? Do you think you might be rather underlining the points people are making here about the dangers of institutionalised paranoia?

 

[johnkingeu]

Wrong and that's an incredibly dangerous assumption to make.

Yet you’ve not been able to provide any evidence to the contrary other than ‘trust me, I’m a journalist’.

 

[OneOffDave]

I thought terrorists tended to attack crowded places? You are saying that when you are walking home alone at night you don’t wear headphones because you are worried about being attacked by terrorists? Do you think you might be rather underlining the points people are making here about the dangers of institutionalised paranoia?

It's more about the point that noise cancelling headphones can affect your situational awareness. This can be the case in terrorist attacks but can also apply regarding the risk of mugging and assault from 'ordinary' criminals. A lot of the Griffin and similar 'terrorist awareness' training also applies to other criminal endevour

 

[Bromley boy]

In fact the HOT protocol is rather sensible and pragmatic:.

I’ve spoken to many ex-military people on the railway who, unlike whoever wrote the protocol, have actually dealt with IEDs in real life. They would all disagree with you and regard the HOT protocol as woefully inadequate.

Following Parson’s Green, I for one have decided that I will never approach or examine an unattended package, as I do not consider the HOT protocol to give me sufficient expertise to identify an innocent bag from a Parsons Green style IED.

I’m simply not paid enough to risk my life for my job.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I must admit I find the HOT protocol surprising as well. If we know it's just a bag of clothes it's no threat. But then if we do know that, it might as well just stay there. But if it *might* be a bomb, it surely needs to be treated in a way that it *is* a bomb. Opening it or picking it up is ill-advised in that case, and I'm not convinced I would either.

 

[Bromley boy]

I must admit I find the HOT protocol surprising as well. If we know it's just a bag of clothes it's no threat. But then if we do know that, it might as well just stay there. But if it *might* be a bomb, it surely needs to be treated in a way that it *is* a bomb. Opening it or picking it up is ill-advised in that case, and I'm not convinced I would either.

Call me cynical but it looks like a tool to minimise delays, in the knowledge most unattended bags are innocent, devised in an office somewhere with no regard for the safety of those who actually have to implement it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Call me cynical but it looks like a tool to minimise delays, in the knowledge most unattended bags are innocent, devised in an office somewhere with no regard for the safety of those who actually have to implement it!

Yes, I'd agree.

That, or of being seen to be doing something while not really doing something, if you see what I mean.

 

[WelshBluebird]

While at the same time, if you went straight into "its a bomb" mode when looking at any unattended bag, well our whole transport network would fall down. It just would not be sustainable to have major station evacuations multiple times a day considering 99.999% of (if not more) unattended bags are totally innocent.

Tbh I am not sure what the answer is, it lies somewhere in the middle. But where in the middle, that is the difficulty.

 

[Mathew S]

It's more about the point that noise cancelling headphones can affect your situational awareness. This can be the case in terrorist attacks but can also apply regarding the risk of mugging and assault from 'ordinary' criminals. A lot of the Griffin and similar 'terrorist awareness' training also applies to other criminal endevour

Exactly

 

[Bromley boy]

While at the same time, if you went straight into "its a bomb" mode when looking at any unattended bag, well our whole transport network would fall down. It just would not be sustainable to have major station evacuations multiple times a day.

I don't disagree with you.

The trouble is, people are being asked to potentially put themselves into harm's way in order to achieve this.

Personally I am no longer comfortable with doing this. There have been several attacks in London already this year including a bomb that would have passed the HOT protocol with flying colours: a Lidl bag on a tube train that was not Hidden, was not Obviously suspicious and was Typical of its environment. If a member of staff had found this bomb, and followed the protocol to the letter, they would have opened it to examine it...

I believe it's a personal decision. Many platform staff and drivers are willing to open bags to inspect them. Personally, in light of recent events, I am no longer one of them.

 

[TheSeeker]

Sorry, meant to say abroad. SNCF had notices and signs, and I believe Eurostar asks too. Not that they are that proactive in enforcing it as far as I can see.

Wasn't there a story of students using the French TGV as a way to move goods for free? Place your suitcases on the train in Marseille, then get off the train before it leaves. Have a friend collect them when the train arrives in Paris.

 

[Joe Paxton]

I don't disagree with you.

The trouble is, people are being asked to potentially put themselves into harm's way in order to achieve this.

Personally I am no longer comfortable with doing this. There have been several attacks in London already this year including a bomb that would have passed the HOT protocol with flying colours: a Lidl bag on a tube train that was not Hidden, was not Obviously suspicious and was Typical of its environment. If a member of staff had found this bomb, and followed the protocol to the letter, they would have opened it to examine it...

And seen what it was.

 

[Bromley boy]

And seen what it was.

And such IEDs are frequently unstable and/or fitted with crude but effective sensors in order to detonate the device upon opening or movement.

Is that something you’d be willing to do as part of your job, with no training? If so, fill your boots. It sounds like a mug’s game to me!

 

[Bletchleyite]

And seen what it was.

Had it not gone bang and blinded them (as a bare minimum) when they did so.

 

[johnkingeu]

Had it not gone bang and blinded them (as a bare minimum) when they did so.

If you’d been unlucky enough to look in at the exact second it detonated, yes.

And such IEDs are frequently unstable and/or fitted with crude but effective sensors in order to detonate the device upon opening or movement.

Are they? I don’t think any IEDs found on the UK transport system have ever been fitted with a tamper device, but correct me if I’m wrong. Unstable, maybe, but they must have been carried to wherever they got to.

 

[Bromley boy]

Are they? I don’t think any IEDs found on the UK transport system have ever been fitted with a tamper device, but correct me if I’m wrong. Unstable, maybe, but they must have been carried to wherever they got to.

I have no idea, I’m no expert, and very few have been found in the UK. I’m basing that on what ex military people who’ve done tours in Iraq and Afghanistan have to say about IEDs.

I’ll be taking their word over what some half-wit from a TOC training team has to say about what is safe or unsafe.

 

[OneOffDave]

I have no idea, I’m no expert, and very few have been found in the UK. I’m basing that on what ex military people who’ve done tours in Iraq and Afghanistan have to say about IEDs.

I’ll be taking their word over what some half-wit from a TOC training team has to say about what is safe or unsafe.

The threat environment and delivery methods for IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan versus the UK are entirely different. The TOC trainers don't make this stuff up on their own, It'll be drawn up nationally and delivered out through the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NACTSO) and police CTSAs. The same people who develop doctrine for the armed forces regarding IEDs also draw up doctrine for the UK civilian sector too

 

[al78]

It's more about the point that noise cancelling headphones can affect your situational awareness.

Going by my observation of the local population, situational awareness is something that is in very short supply at the best of times. The really clueless ones can be identified by looking for the smartphone (pity we can't have smartusers).

 

[jon0844]

I thought terrorists tended to attack crowded places? You are saying that when you are walking home alone at night you don’t wear headphones because you are worried about being attacked by terrorists? Do you think you might be rather underlining the points people are making here about the dangers of institutionalised paranoia?

I would have thought that wearing noise cancelling headphones when walking home alone at night, or standing on a platform, or driving (plenty of people now wear headphones) is silly for a number of reasons.

You may not be aware of your surroundings and unable to see someone following you, hear a car that is out of control and hooting to warn you of a collision, hearing a fire alarm or calls to evacuate, and much more.

Common sense applies and once you're sitting in your seat then it's less of a problem. You'd surely notice if there was a sudden emergency on a train or plane and you had headphones on.

I wouldn't block myself out from the world when waiting for a train, if only to avoid missing the 'platform change' announcement or finding out my train is cancelled and everyone has made for the bus/taxi rank because there won't be any trains for a couple of hours...