Prague Airport (PRG)

[Butts]

Interesting set up they have for transit from entry to plane.

First you go through Passport Control then to the Lounge (if eligible) and then Security is by the actual Gate your aircraft is leaving from.

This means there is no FT Security and I was a bit apprehensive about the set up but it all went seamlessly. Could be a bit of a pain if you were planning to take drinks onboard for the journey? - luckily I was in Club so didn't have to worry.

Footnote no questions on entry to Prague - just a stamp and out !!

 

[The exile]

Interesting set up they have for transit from entry to plane.

First you go through Passport Control then to the Lounge (if eligible) and then Security is by the actual Gate your aircraft is leaving from.

This means there is no FT Security and I was a bit apprehensive about the set up but it all went seamlessly. Could be a bit of a pain if you were planning to take drinks onboard for the journey? - luckily I was in Club so didn't have to worry.

Footnote no questions on entry to Prague - just a stamp and out !!

Two advantages: you only need one set of facilities and 2) you are very unlikely to miss your flight because of security delays. Given the fact that security and border staff only need to be there when a gate is operational, it would be interesting to know how much more staff intensive it is (I suspect less than you might think)
It is disconcerting the first time you meet it.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Two advantages: you only need one set of facilities and 2) you are very unlikely to miss your flight because of security delays. Given the fact that security and border staff only need to be there when a gate is operational, it would be interesting to know how much more staff intensive it is (I suspect less than you might think)
It is disconcerting the first time you meet it.

How do they prevent potentially dangerous persons from entering the airport?

 

[The exile]

At all airports I’ve ever used, security stops you getting airside, not into the airport itself. Although terrorism (and nutters) is obviously a global problem, I’m not aware of Czechia having any significant domestic threat.
There are plenty of smaller airports where security and the gates are in similar proximity - because of their size. In terms of general safety it doesn’t make that much difference.

 

[Farigiraf]

Used PRG in 2017/18 - Drinks bought in the airport (not sure how they find this out) were put in separate trays and sent through the x-ray. Usually no problem.

 

[edwin_m]

At all airports I’ve ever used, security stops you getting airside, not into the airport itself. Although terrorism (and nutters) is obviously a global problem, I’m not aware of Czechia having any significant domestic threat.
There are plenty of smaller airports where security and the gates are in similar proximity - because of their size. In terms of general safety it doesn’t make that much difference.

Istanbul airport in 2012 had scanning at the entrance to the terminal, and after that a "normal" setup including another scan when going airside.

 

[AlastairFraser]

At all airports I’ve ever used, security stops you getting airside, not into the airport itself. Although terrorism (and nutters) is obviously a global problem, I’m not aware of Czechia having any significant domestic threat.
There are plenty of smaller airports where security and the gates are in similar proximity - because of their size. In terms of general safety it doesn’t make that much difference.

Yes, but having this arrangement at a larger airport surely means that people with malicious intent can access areas close to several gates and cause more casualties than at a larger airport than a more traditional arrangement?

Smaller airports usually attract less risk inherently, because the purpose of organised attacks is often for publicity and an incident at a smaller airports is less of a headline (notable exceptions including London City, Belfast George Best etc.).

Maybe they have hidden security measures before security.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, but having this arrangement at a larger airport surely means that people with malicious intent can access areas close to several gates and cause more casualties than at a larger airport than a more traditional arrangement?

Smaller airports usually attract less risk inherently, because the purpose of organised attacks is often for publicity and an incident at a smaller airports is less of a headline (notable exceptions including London City, Belfast George Best etc.).

Maybe they have hidden security measures before security.

It's reasonable to have security measures to stop people bringing weapons or devices onto a plane, because a small bomb or even a gunshot can cause a lot of damage on board, up to and including bringing down the aircraft. But anywhere else, it's likely that someone wishing to do so could cause just as much carnage by attacking the security queue as they could anywhere afterwards.

 

[The exile]

It's reasonable to have security measures to stop people bringing weapons or devices onto a plane, because a small bomb or even a gunshot can cause a lot of damage on board, up to and including bringing down the aircraft. But anywhere else, it's likely that someone wishing to do so could cause just as much carnage by attacking the security queue as they could anywhere afterwards.

Indeed, and in a city like Prague there are several much more high profile targets that by their very nature are almost completely unprotectable.

 

[AlastairFraser]

It's reasonable to have security measures to stop people bringing weapons or devices onto a plane, because a small bomb or even a gunshot can cause a lot of damage on board, up to and including bringing down the aircraft. But anywhere else, it's likely that someone wishing to do so could cause just as much carnage by attacking the security queue as they could anywhere afterwards.

The security queue at most airports at least is one high profile location to protect, not many different gates.

 

[The exile]

The security queue at most airports at least is one high profile location to protect, not many different gates.

Which means that there is a single high profile location - as opposed to many minor ones - none of which would be as significant a target as a major tourist attraction or shopping centre.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Which means that there is a single high profile location - as opposed to many minor ones - none of which would be as significant a target as a major tourist attraction or shopping centre.

Depends who is at the gate, and my point is that one single location is more easily defensible.

 

[The exile]

Depends who is at the gate, and my point is that one single location is more easily defensible.

Anyone who is known to be that high a terror risk is unlikely to be at a gate or in the security line. If they're not a known risk, then no-one's going to be deliberately protecting them wherever they are (more than normal security measures).

 

[AlastairFraser]

Anyone who is known to be that high a terror risk is unlikely to be at a gate or in the security line. If they're not a known risk, then no-one's going to be deliberately protecting them wherever they are (more than normal security measures).

It's better safe than sorry to assume that they may be.

 

[philosopher]

Interesting set up they have for transit from entry to plane.

First you go through Passport Control then to the Lounge (if eligible) and then Security is by the actual Gate your aircraft is leaving from.

This means there is no FT Security and I was a bit apprehensive about the set up but it all went seamlessly. Could be a bit of a pain if you were planning to take drinks onboard for the journey? - luckily I was in Club so didn't have to worry.

Footnote no questions on entry to Prague - just a stamp and out !!

I seem to recall the former Berlin Tegel airport and current Singapore airport having a set up like this, at least for some of the gates.

 

[dosxuk]

Depends who is at the gate, and my point is that one single location is more easily defensible.

Airport security is not about protecting the airport. It's about protecting the aircraft that utilise that airport. Therefore it makes little difference, in terms of fulfilling that function, whether the security checkpoint is at the front door or the aircraft door.

 

[Whisky Papa]

Indeed, and in a city like Prague there are several much more high profile targets that by their very nature are almost completely unprotectable.

Quite. I've used the airport at Prague more than any other in Europe and have no issues with the layout - in fact, I think it is much better than the unpredictability of the usual 'security check first' layout. I've tried to see a potential disadvantage of arriving and departing passengers mingling in a way we are not used to, but so far I've failed to think of one.

I don't think I've seen it mentioned above that to get into the departures area, you need to have presented a valid boarding card and, assuming you are at the non-Schengen Terminal 1, had your passport checked. You cannot just casually walk in, and exiting will require a passport check too.

 

[mpthomson]

It's better safe than sorry to assume that they may be.

However the terrorist threat in Prague is minimal compared to places like UK, France, Germany etc. There hasn't been mass attack in the city (or country) in living memory, other than a non-terror linked mass shooting in 2014, and it has a very low level of Islamist activity, which is where the vast majority of recent European terrorist mass attacks have based their ideology. They'll be taking the measures that they feel are appropriate according to the risks that they are aware of (and we may well not know about).

Single points with large numbers of people milling around them are not 'easily defensible', in fact they make a far more attractive target.

 

[Butts]

Quite. I've used the airport at Prague more than any other in Europe and have no issues with the layout - in fact, I think it is much better than the unpredictability of the usual 'security check first' layout. I've tried to see a potential disadvantage of arriving and departing passengers mingling in a way we are not used to, but so far I've failed to think of one.

I don't think I've seen it mentioned above that to get into the departures area, you need to have presented a valid boarding card and, assuming you are at the non-Schengen Terminal 1, had your passport checked. You cannot just casually walk in, and exiting will require a passport check too.

It is strange to see the Passport Control Exit for incoming passengers when you are walking around Terminal 1.

My biggest disappointment was the lack of a smoking area - it's very hit and miss these days with no rationality and differences within Airports in different parts of the UK and European Airports within the same Country.

 

[Mag_seven]

My biggest disappointment was the lack of a smoking area

Now there's a surprise.

 

[Butts]

Now there's a surprise.

Never mind I'm off to Venice next week and Marco Polo Airport has a lovely one right by where the BA Flights depart from last time I went.

 

[nwales58]

Security at gate alone, many years ago, was common in Europe (outside Britain where big bangs had been a problem since the 1970s). CDG 2A-D were designed to work that way for beautifully fast straight line kerb-check in-gate flows, now hobbled.

CPH domestic, in the micro-terminal by the car park at the west end of the building, 20 years ago had minimal security.

All depends on risk.

In some parts of the world security outside the terminal or even at airport perimeter and then again at departures or/and at the gate is common. Egypt, Syria (when it was stable), Nigeria, Uzbekistan ...

 

[atillathehunn]

Security at gate alone, many years ago, was common in Europe (outside Britain where big bangs had been a problem since the 1970s). CDG 2A-D were designed to work that way for beautifully fast straight line kerb-check in-gate flows, now hobbled.

CPH domestic, in the micro-terminal by the car park at the west end of the building, 20 years ago had minimal security.

All depends on risk.

In some parts of the world security outside the terminal or even at airport perimeter and then again at departures or/and at the gate is common. Egypt, Syria (when it was stable), Nigeria, Uzbekistan ...

Nairobi JKIA has a full check point on the road in. Everybody has to get out the car and walk through a check point (unless you have an LP), while the driver pulls forward to the other side. However, if you drive yourself to the airport alone, you just get a cursory look round the car... Then at the terminal door there is security, then there is normal security, and then there's a screening to get access to certain gates (usually 19-22 for European flights).

Nairobi Wilson has a bloke with a metal detecting wand and a baggage belt that usually is broken (depending on the 'terminal' you are departing from. The Air Kenya terminal is superb, but still cursory).

Amazingly Kabul only has a quick document check point at the gate for non-UN/CD vehicles and then a cursory pre-screening on the way into the terminal. There is normal security, but it's liquids in bags, laptops out.

Uzbekistan only has a quick scan at the door, with regular security inside (or at least that's the case at the new sparkly Samarkand terminal).

 

[The exile]

Security at gate alone, many years ago, was common in Europe (outside Britain where big bangs had been a problem since the 1970s). CDG 2A-D were designed to work that way for beautifully fast straight line kerb-check in-gate flows, now hobbled.

CPH domestic, in the micro-terminal by the car park at the west end of the building, 20 years ago had minimal security.

All depends on risk.

In some parts of the world security outside the terminal or even at airport perimeter and then again at departures or/and at the gate is common. Egypt, Syria (when it was stable), Nigeria, Uzbekistan ...

Indeed - and I remember being amazed at the security protecting the El Al check in desk at Frankfurt in December 1988 as I waited at the PanAm desk to check in for flight PA103. A week later we all knew why….

 

[Butts]

Never mind I'm off to Venice next week and Marco Polo Airport has a lovely one right by where the BA Flights depart from last time I went.

Who said leaving the EU was a good idea ?

Smoking area still there but it and the Marco Polo Lounge are now before Passport Control

 

[route101]

I recall Amsterdam had security at the gate. Last time I went through it was no longer the case.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Quite. I've used the airport at Prague more than any other in Europe and have no issues with the layout - in fact, I think it is much better than the unpredictability of the usual 'security check first' layout. I've tried to see a potential disadvantage of arriving and departing passengers mingling in a way we are not used to, but so far I've failed to think of one.

It's really not a problem at all to have them together. Many Schengen airports just deposit people into the departures lounge if they're coming from Schengen, because it's much easier than having an entirely separated arrivals area. Some airports such as Malaga even deposit passengers from outside the Customs Union into the departure lounge, with only people collecting baggage required to go through customs controls.

 

[Jamiescott1]

I recall Amsterdam had security at the gate. Last time I went through it was no longer the case.

I was thinking that. Remember it when transiting but there on a direct flight last year and no security at gate