Passport control before Checkin

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:03:12 -0000, "Miss L. Toe"
wrote:


"Hilary" wrote in message
...
It also said on the passport/id booth that you needed to show your ID
and
ticket or e-ticket Itenerary - does this mean you can't get away with
just
carrying the booking reference number ? (Ok I know its a good idea to
carry
printouts, but what if you lose them).

Many carriers are now requiring you to carry the e-ticket itinerary. I
have been told that in some airports you need to show the itinerary to get
through security.


So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets' ?


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

"Martin WY" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:03:12 -0000, "Miss L. Toe"
wrote:


"Hilary" wrote in message
...
It also said on the passport/id booth that you needed to show your ID
and
ticket or e-ticket Itenerary - does this mean you can't get away with
just
carrying the booking reference number ? (Ok I know its a good idea to
carry
printouts, but what if you lose them).

Many carriers are now requiring you to carry the e-ticket itinerary. I
have been told that in some airports you need to show the itinerary to
get
through security.


So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets' ?


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

It should, and has for me. I recently booked a KLM e-ticket HUY-ARN at 9pm
Sunday to travel 10:30am Monday, and printed the e-mail just for my own
reference. They only wanted to see my passport to check in, brought up my
itinerary by name.

Res

In message , Martin WY
writes
So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets' ?


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

I think you are missing the point. It's not about the airline knowing
you are the genuine paid-up passenger for that seat (after all they can
eject you right up to departure if it turns out you are an imposter),
but stopping penniless terrorists from being able to enter parts of the
airport. All they need do is buy a ticket to somewhere, and instant
access!
--
Roland Perry

"resenär" wrote in message
...
"Martin WY" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:03:12 -0000, "Miss L. Toe"
wrote:


"Hilary" wrote in message
...
It also said on the passport/id booth that you needed to show your
ID
and
ticket or e-ticket Itenerary - does this mean you can't get away
with
just
carrying the booking reference number ? (Ok I know its a good idea
to
carry
printouts, but what if you lose them).

Many carriers are now requiring you to carry the e-ticket itinerary.
I
have been told that in some airports you need to show the itinerary
to
get
through security.


So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move
away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets'
?


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

It should, and has for me. I recently booked a KLM e-ticket HUY-ARN at 9pm
Sunday to travel 10:30am Monday, and printed the e-mail just for my own
reference. They only wanted to see my passport to check in, brought up my
itinerary by name.


Thats the way it *should* work, (and always has for me in the USA), but
having tested Ryanair several times, they always demand the booking
reference number (its OK if its written on a scruffy yellow sticky) - next
time I'll try memorising it and see if thats OK. But MRU immigration and CDG
(T2) passport exit control seem to want the printed itenary.

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , Martin WY
writes
So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move
away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets'
?


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

I think you are missing the point. It's not about the airline knowing
you are the genuine paid-up passenger for that seat (after all they can
eject you right up to departure if it turns out you are an imposter),
but stopping penniless terrorists from being able to enter parts of the
airport. All they need do is buy a ticket to somewhere, and instant
access!


But the penniles (and multimillionaire) terriorists seem to have given up on
the airline industry (for now). They may return to it once we have to take
our shoes off to get on a bus, or train.

In article ,
"Miss L. Toe" wrote:


So does this mean that the e-ticket move is nothing more than a move away
from relatively difficult to forge 'tickets' to easy to forge 'tickets' ?

mabe that, but cost of issuance is apparently much lower

In article ,
Martin WY wrote:


Doesnt it all come down to what the airline has in its computer at
check-in, irrelevant of what bit of paper with numbers on it that a
person might have in their mits?

That, or be able to access their computer systems at checkin (via the
airport's computer terminals)

Miss L. Toe wrote:

But the penniles (and multimillionaire) terriorists seem to have given up on
the airline industry (for now). They may return to it once we have to take
our shoes off to get on a bus, or train.


Air travel is increasing.

Regarding the terrorist thing. The train bombings killed 200, the planes
about 3000. You can't drive a train into a packed skyscraper or packed
stadium.

mtravelkay writes:

Regarding the terrorist thing. The train bombings killed 200, the
planes about 3000. You can't drive a train into a packed skyscraper or
packed stadium.

No, this is dangerously naive.

The train bombs killed 200 people because some of them went off BEFORE
they went into the station - some of the trains were late. What if
the bombs had gone off at the planned time in the planned location
(all inside the station, one presumes)? What if the station had
collapsed while full of commuters? Thousands would have died.

--
-- Chris.

"mtravelkay" wrote in message
m...
Miss L. Toe wrote:

But the penniles (and multimillionaire) terriorists seem to have given
up on
the airline industry (for now). They may return to it once we have to
take
our shoes off to get on a bus, or train.


Air travel is increasing.

Regarding the terrorist thing. The train bombings killed 200, the planes
about 3000.

I suspect the 3,000 (I thought it was now down to 2,000) was more luck than
judgement. From the documentaries I saw I suspect theey were expecting fewer
deaths.

You can't drive a train into a packed skyscraper or packed
stadium.


How many terrorists did they loose in the planes ? vs how many might they
loose from the trains.