
You can no longer just leave Syracuse airport [video] - ck2
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/53594630
======
mdip
It sounds like the "main purpose" of this system is to create a one-way exit
to prevent people from accessing the terminal without going through the
security checkpoint (using the exit as an entrance). It's a problem that every
airport has solved in one way or another by either posting security or using
existing, novel, techniques. In an attempt to "improve" on the one-way exit
idea, they've created a user experience that is exceptionally foreign to
anyone using it and also adds a one second jarring experience that gives the
impression of being detained in a tall, glass, coffin.

At one of the major airports I used to travel through (DTW), exiting the
terminal involved going through a slow-moving motorized revolving door. It was
one way, and also included a brief instant where you could neither enter, nor
leave, and could be "stopped" by airport security at that point should
detaining you be necessary. Because it's a revolving door that works very
similar to nearly every revolving door a person encounters (save for the motor
and one-way nature), it doesn't have that same feel and certainly wouldn't
warrant an NBC News segment.

I'd imagine this over-engineered solution to a solved problem also comes at a
much steeper price tag.

~~~
AutoCorrect
not only that, they've created a novel way to trap people inside a burning
building. This is a terrible idea.

~~~
superuser2
Building code would almost certainly require a tie-in to the fire alarm so
that it allows free passage when there's a fire. If it's like many airports,
there would be other alarmed fire exits, and you could easily go under/over
the crowd control ropes if you had to.

------
jblow
I am surprised that so many people here are okay with the idea of being
momentarily detained as a matter of course.

This is not a turnstile, because turnstiles do not detain you or trap you; you
can always move freely on one side or the other. This device detains you and
then lets you move on. What are you going to do when it decides not to let you
move on?

~~~
ubernostrum
There are already airports which have pairs of sliding doors with a room
between them, timed so there's a moment when the first door is closed behind
you and the second one hasn't opened ahead, in which you're "detained".

And practically every subway system already has one-way turnstiles that can
"detain" you in the sense that you can't pass until it opens, and either can't
return through it without re-inserting a fare card or can't return through it
period.

In fact, there's a _fuck ton_ of controlled-access places with systems which
effectively do this. What are you already doing for the "detainees" who
already are created by those?

(not that I like the TSA, I just also don't see why you're treating this as
new or unusual)

~~~
jblow
I have never encountered a situation like this before in an airport. If I were
to, I would be very disturbed, and avoid that airport in the future. So, this
is new and unusual to me. (Apparently, also, to enough people to make this
video notable).

Subways that I have seen that require fare cards on exit do not actually
prevent you from leaving; you can jump the turnstile or go through a gate on
the side that possibly alarms. This is not the greatest thing, but at least
while you are inside you can move freely inside a large subway system; being
encased in plexiglass until a light turns green is a whole different degree of
trapped.

Edit: And I guess this is an important part of the point: degree matters. The
old boiling-a-frog story is just about slowly increasing the degree of
something.

~~~
warfangle
Yeah you have. Just not physically.

When you exit the secure area of the airport, you usually pass through a
corridor with tons of CCTV cameras and a TSA employee. Those cameras and that
employee are to keep you from turning around and re-entering the terminal once
you've begun the process of exiting.

~~~
jblow
You are responding to something totally different than what I was saying. Yes,
we all know that there is a one-way exit from security zones in airports.

When you are passing through such an area, you are free to move unless you are
detained, which in theory would not happen without good reason. The idea is
that you are free to exit and just cannot go back in.

When you enter one of these chambers, you are detained by default until you
are released. You are not free to go in any direction. It is very different.

~~~
warfangle
I was responding fairly specifically to "I have never encountered a situation
like this before in an airport."

edit: the operative word in your sentence is "_like_" and "_never_"

My point is, you have encountered systems "like" this, if you have ever exited
an airport secure area. And it's the secure area, not the airport building
itself.

also; boiling frog analogy is quite flawed

------
ynniv
I can see how this appears to replace a TSA employee watching for reverse
travel, but what has been created is of a different nature. Atlanta's airport
has a similar reverse-travel prevention system in the form of a 3 story
escalator, but there travelers can't be easily singled out. This individual
door system is a security camera and a remote override away from individual
detainment. Add facial recognition (the physical conditions are ideal) and the
only thing separating this from an automated warrant officer is a willing
politician. It seems out of place to be upset by what appears to be an
automatic door, but some forethought suggests this is substantially different
from what it replaced.

~~~
superuser2
Serious question: should we not be able to arrest people we have arrest
warrants for? Is there a right to flee arrest?

The only difference from the status quo is that currently, you could try to
run from the police once recognized and they might not be fast enough to
tackle you. But as far as I know, the Constitution does not enshrine any
principle of "the right to a sporting chance at escaping trial" \- just "the
right to a fair trial."

~~~
ynniv
Of course we should. But an automated warrant officer would also be something
new...

Airports seem to have their own notion of legality, so at what point would it
detain someone? An international warrant? US felony warrant? US state felony?
Misdemeanor? Back taxes? Unpaid child support? Unpaid municipal fines? We
accept all major credit cards! You didn't report for jury duty... mind telling
us where you live now? And while you're here, we'd like to inform you that
your ex-roommate has run afoul of the law... perhaps you've seen him lately?
Let me get the investigating officer on the line...

Facial recognition primarily fails because the camera is too far away, and at
a poor angle. Please stare at this camera to open the door. Hmm, those glasses
are getting in the way, mind taking them off? Please, don't bang on the glass
like that, it scares the other travelers. Just a second, I'll black out the
"privacy" glass.

Anything that can be done will be done in the right context. A little
imagination is always prudent!

------
cdjk
Here's an article about it if you don't to watch the video:

[http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/11/syracuse_airp...](http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/11/syracuse_airport_exit_portals.html)

It sounds like it's an electronic one-way gate to exit the secure area of the
airport, replacing the TSA agent who used to sit at the exit. Physical one-way
turnstiles have been around for a while - I'm not sure I've ever seen one at
an airport.

~~~
koenigdavidmj
I would assume that getting a cartful of bags through the turnstiles is kind
of difficult, and that's the reason that strategy has been avoided.

EDIT: Grammar.

~~~
frostmatthew
Since it would presumably be located before baggage-claim people are unlikely
to have a "cartful of bags" at this point - they would only have what they're
capable of carrying on the plane.

~~~
saryant
Given the massive suitcases I've seen some people try to gate-check, I'm not
sure that's such a great idea.

------
blisterpeanuts
It's a one-way exit from the secure area of the terminal. Functionally it's
the same as a guard standing there watching people file through to a one-way
escalator or door into the public part of the airport.

Personally, I'd prefer the human. This system sounds too complicated and
expensive and prone to malfunction. What if there's a fire and the doors stop
working?

------
tehwebguy
What purpose could this possibly serve that is more important than have proper
fire exits?

~~~
TallGuyShort
I suspect it's a reaction to the LAX shooting to prevent an attacker from
fleeing on foot so easily - similar to the double bank doors you sometimes see
on banks in dangerous countries. More important than proper fire exits? No.
Just my theory on the possible purpose.

~~~
ck2
So keep the gunman locked in with more people around them to shoot?

------
PhasmaFelis
I'm confused. I was ready to be upset about this, but assuming they're telling
the truth it's just an overly-complex version of a turnstile/one-way revolving
door. I've never seen an airport that didn't have some sort of one-way-
enforcing mechanism on the terminal-to-baggage-claim passage. Am I missing
something? Or is the issue just that it's unnecessarily complex and failure-
prone?

~~~
lambda
Most airports have large sliding doors that are triggered on one side only.
Because they are large, and there are a lot of people flowing through them, it
would be possible to slip in while the door is open, so they need human guards
to watch and ensure that no one does that.

A regular turnstile doesn't really work very well for people with a lot of
luggage.

So this is basically a large version of a turnstile, that is more secure than
just a single gate, so it can be secure enough to leave without full time
guards without preventing people with baggage from getting through.

Not a bad idea, not horrible civil liberties wise, but could be a problem for
people with claustrophobia, and if they are avoiding having a guard, it's
likely that there won't be an alternative exit for people for whom these won't
work.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
Ordinarily I'd agree with the claustrophobia point, but I feel like anyone who
genuinely can't deal with a few seconds in a glass-walled airlock would never
have managed getting on a plane in the first place.

~~~
lambda
As a matter of fact, my SO gets claustrophobia in revolving doors; she always
refuses to go through them if there's another alternative, even the really big
ones. She's fine on planes, however. I'm not sure whether these would give her
the same sense of claustrophobia that revolving doors do.

------
sciguy77
Open the pod bay doors, Hal.

------
rayiner
> installing the portals has allowed Syracuse to eliminate a security job at
> the exit lanes

Works for me. Unlike TSA workers, automated exit doors can't form unions.

~~~
metaphorm
unlike human workers, automated exit doors don't hesitate to imprison the
occupant with no thought about the situation.

these are jail cells, not doors.

~~~
res0nat0r
They are not jail cells. We had the same thing in restricted hallways when I
worked my prior job in big pharma. They were used mainly to allow big hallway
access and securely allow one person at a time through the door, with weight
sensors at the bottom of the pod.

You can override these doors most likely with an emergency button if needed.

~~~
thirdtruck
On the other hand, that company building was not an essential destination of
travel for millions of people.

------
jcdavis
This is a bait headline, its just an automated machine to only allow exits.
Several airports in Europe have similar systems

------
ringmaster
Philadelphia airport has been like this for years already. The "airlock" isn't
a single-person, but a small room that can lock a handful of people in as they
pass individually through some unjumpable turnstiles. I'd post a photo, but
there are signs around the room forbidding photography.

~~~
jasonlotito
Having just gone through the Philadelphia airport in October, I don't remember
anything of the sort. Maybe it's only in a specific area for a specific
reason? But no, you can go from plane to free air without being in any sort of
"airlock" like this.

~~~
ringmaster
The airlocks are not at all of the terminals, so it's not surprising you
didn't see it.

Here's a PDF explaining the airlock rooms at PHL (they call it a "secure exit
lane system") with photos: [http://www.aci-
na.org/sites/default/files/tufts.pdf](http://www.aci-
na.org/sites/default/files/tufts.pdf)

If you look closely at the metal turnstiles in the bottom-right photo on page
8, you can see that there are glass doors between them. These separate and
close by sensor to allow only one person at a time through the exit passage.
This room is, by necessity, fully covered in cameras, and as other posters
have said, it's a short jump from this into something with software
recognition that locks the doors and waits for the armored men with clubs.

Sure, it's a far cry from the firetraps that those glass tubes in Syracuse
are, but this method of containment is not new -- we were just not really
paying attention to it before.

------
kyleblarson
Saving money by spending millions to replace a couple of $20 per hour TSA
goons?

------
URSpider94
This is just a one-way door to prevent people from walking the wrong way into
the sterile area. Today, human beings have to sit there and watch people walk
past all day -- what a boring and demeaning job!!!

This is NOT a new security measure, it's the same old measure implemented in a
different way.

I think people are freaking out about the fact that the system detains you for
a split second in the process. There are better solutions out there. For
example, all of the train turnstiles in Japan are set to default-open. If they
detect someone going through without paying, they close extremely rapidly as
soon as you cross the front threshold. That should do the trick, although I
guess it wouldn't stop someone from passing contraband across the gap.

------
jcromartie
Who schmoozed and boozed to get this contract, instead of a normal one-way
turnstile door?

------
arnarbi
Every single European airport I have been to has this kind of portals to get
from inside the secured terminal area to the baggage claim area.

------
URSpider94
An article I found pointed out the probable root cause -- the TSA is now
refusing to staff exits from secure areas, claiming that they are only
responsible for screening. That puts the burden for exit monitoring onto the
airport operators. Naturally, this cost falls disproportionately on smaller
airports where the volume of passengers over which to amortize the cost is
less.

------
gphil
I actually walked through this thing a couple of weeks ago. It was a little
weird, but I didn't feel "detained" at any point. It just felt like going
through a high-tech turnstile, as others have theorized it would.

------
mgoeppner
As a former resident of Syracuse, I think these beat the old barrier ropes,
doors which looked like they were from a mental hospital, and a lone slightly
pissed off and exhausted TSA agent eyeballing you and your fellow passengers
in an otherwise desolate airport at 11 evening.

And there are very, very, very few arrivals (and also virtually no departures)
between 10PM and 5AM, which means it doesn't make much sense to pay a single
TSA agent for an eight hour graveyard shift for 2 or 3 incoming flights.

------
bisrig
Having been through SYR recently - the doors are pretty annoying. When I was
there, they had a bunch of signs telling people to go through in groups, which
was hilarious as 1) the door midpoint area is about the size of one person
plus their carry-on, and 2) the door timing would close the door much too
quickly to actually have more than one person enter. Also, the cycle time is
pretty slow. Really, really bad design.

------
newman314
This has already previously been invented at subway stations.

Take this.
[http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.474936.131463560...](http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.474936.1314635607!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/alg-
subway-turnstiles-jpg.jpg)

and make it bigger. Boom, problem solved.

Side benefit: This can be an entirely mechanical design = energy efficient.

------
buyx
I wonder what the throughput of these doors is, and if it would work at larger
airports. My guess would be no.

Because of the high crime rate, most banks in South Africa have these double-
door man traps (although less sleek-looking), and everyone accepts them as a
normal part of life. Reading the comments here reminds me of how abnormal that
really is.

------
phy6
I've seen and used devices like these at various Federal facilities and you
stay inside for 3-4 seconds until a guard pushes a button to open the other
side. The guards called them scanners and said that they sniff for explosives.
These look identical, so maybe sniffing is an add-on feature.

------
nphase
These are all over the place in Frankfurt. They are unmanned and nondescript,
it's literally just the door you exit through. There are no lights or
anything, but somehow they make it seem pretty clear that it's just to keep
people from slipping through in the unintended direction.

------
mattmcknight
Seems like yet another challenge when flying with a few little kids...hope it
doesn't spread.

------
jakewalker
Mountain out of a mole hill. These doors simply ensure that people can only
exit, and not enter, a secure area.

There are dozens of civil liberty violations to complaint about w/r/t airports
and TSA. This isn't one of them.

------
privong
For what it's worth, a similar system is in place at the Madrid Airport.

------
maxk42
Unlawful imprisonment.

------
Glyptodon
What happens if there's a fire or something?

~~~
URSpider94
I'm sure that you can just push on the doors and get out, with an associated
alarm that clears the terminal.

If there's a fire, I'm sure that all the doors open.

Airports are not exempt from building codes.

------
mariuolo
I hope these news exaggerate facts, because every day I read something it
looks like the US is on its path to become a Soviet hell.

------
coldcode
How does this work with people who are disabled? Elderly people with canes or
walkers or on wheelchairs?

------
stiles
This looks like a giant PITA for people with small children or anyone
escorting someone with a handicap.

------
lxmorj
Well fuck, I live here. That sucks.

