U.S. to Require Passenger Lists for Flights

[jdobbin]

It is a pretty hefty amount of information that has to be gathered 72 hours before a fight. Passenger itinerary? Doe everyone have to have that? Will they deny someone a flight in Canada to Brazil if they don't give a complete itinerary? Will this eventually extend to flights from Canadian destination to Canadian destination?

It seems the issue of privacy is being pushed ever further in the name of security.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Under a new U.S. proposal, Canadian airlines flying to southern destinations over U.S. airspace would be forced to hand over personal information about their passengers.

The U.S. Secure Flight program being proposed by the Department of Homeland Security would require airlines to transmit passenger manifest data up to 72 hours ahead of scheduled flights -- despite the fact the planes would neither take-off nor land in the U.S.

The program would affect flights to and from vacation hot spots such as Mexico, Costa Rica and Brazil.

Canadian airlines would be required to provide:

* Passengers' full name

* Date of birth

* Gender

* 'Known traveller number' -- an identifier given to passengers the U.S. deems do not pose a threat

But under the proposal, the U.S. would also like information such as passengers' itineraries, including departure airport code, departure time, and arrival destination and time.

The goal, according to a report in The Globe and Mail, is to prevent known or suspected terrorists from boarding planes, possibly putting others at risk.

The Department of Homeland Security's Trasportation Security Agency has filed Notice of Proposed Rulemaking documents on the proposal.

[M.Dancer]

I think they are just tying up loose ends. They can effect tighter secuirty for planes arriving and departing from the US, and for planes making pit stops but the chink in the armour are planes flying over the US.

This is the sort of inconvience we must abide. What's more, it should be reciprocal.

[jdobbin]

I think they are just tying up loose ends. They can effect tighter secuirty for planes arriving and departing from the US, and for planes making pit stops but the chink in the armour are planes flying over the US.

This is the sort of inconvience we must abide. What's more, it should be reciprocal.

It would be pretty bad if people could not fly on Canadian plane between Calgary and Toronto because the U.S. says so. That is the second shoe to drop according to some observers: a so-called loose end of flights that cross for a time into the U.S.

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

[guyser]

I think they are just tying up loose ends. They can effect tighter secuirty for planes arriving and departing from the US, and for planes making pit stops but the chink in the armour are planes flying over the US.

This is the sort of inconvience we must abide. What's more, it should be reciprocal.

Errrr.....not sure about tying up loose ends.

They will exclude the planes that dip into the US, think Van to TO , so if they exclude those then exclude any that are not landing in the US.

CDN airtransport developed the no fly list with great input from the DHS , so there is the concession.

Tell 'em to pound sand.

[M.Dancer]

It would be pretty bad if people could not fly on Canadian plane between Calgary and Toronto because the U.S. says so. That is the second shoe to drop according to some observers: a so-called loose end of flights that cross for a time into the U.S.

Do Toronto to Calgary flights ovr fly the US?

[jdobbin]

Do Toronto to Calgary flights ovr fly the US?

Yes. Many of the flights from the west cross into the U.S.

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

[M.Dancer]

Yes. Many of the flights from the west cross into the U.S.

Then given they can deny Canadian flights the right to overfly than I suppose they can demand we comply or we can go the long way around.

[jdobbin]

Then given they can deny Canadian flights the right to overfly than I suppose they can demand we comply or we can go the long way around.

What do you think Air Canada would do? It might be one M.Dancer standing on the tarmac watching his flight take off and hoping he can get a VIA Rail to Calgary (at least Harper is giving the train service a hundred or million or so to provide transport for those in Canada who somehow earned a place on the U.S. list).

I wonder if we will have to provide notice 72 hours in advance for travel between Canadian cities? What if you have a funeral to go to suddenly? Sorry, can't make it...security, you know.

[Higgly]

Put pressure on Canadian airlines to fly Canadian only routes. This is just another data snooping adventure by the ever paranoid bum-sniffers in the CIA. Sure 9/11 was terrible but on the world scale, and certainly on a scale of the things that the US has done in some of its international frolics, it does not deserve this degree of obsession. You can be damned sure that record of your little jaunt will never go away and will be linked to every other blessed thing you have ever done anywhere near the almighty presence of the big head.

I agree. Let them pound sand. Take your business to the first airline that offers to fly Canada-only routes. Hell, the scenery over northern Ontario can be damned pretty this time of year.

Edited October 11, 2007 by Higgly

[guyser]

Put pressure on Canadian airlines to fly Canadian only routes. This is just another data snooping adventure by the ever paranoid bum-sniffers in the CIA. Sure 9/11 was terrible but on the world scale, and certainly on a scale of the things that the US has done in some of its international frolics, it does not deserve this degree of obsession. You can be damned sure that record of your little jaunt will never go away and will be linked to every other blessed thing you have ever done anywhere near the almighty presence of the big head.

I agree. Let them pound sand. Take your business to the first airline that offers to fly Canada-only routes. Hell, the scenery over northern Ontario can be damned pretty this time of year.

That is no answer at all. The airlines would be broke in months...if not days.

They have to compete on the world scale and that means flying out of this country. As for flying where, the fastest way is the big circle and that means cutting thru the US for certain routes. It also means that the US carriers fly over northern Canada for Int'l routes like europe etc.

[Higgly]

That is no answer at all. The airlines would be broke in months...if not days.

They have to compete on the world scale and that means flying out of this country. As for flying where, the fastest way is the big circle and that means cutting thru the US for certain routes. It also means that the US carriers fly over northern Canada for Int'l routes like europe etc.

They do not have to compete with airlines from outside Canada on Canadian routes. This is what cabotage is all about. Do you honestly think an airline would go broke offering flights (even at a slighty higher cost) that took Canadian routes in order to protect your privacy? Advertising can sell anything and I'll bet there are a lot of advertising agencies that would just lick their lips at the thought of selling this concept to Canadians. Hell, they could probably even get Rick Mercer to be the hapless Canuck passenger. The guy would just eat it up. Even if they just offered it on the eastern Canada <-> western Canada routes, the brownie points would be a big win with Canadian consumers.

Edited October 11, 2007 by Higgly

[guyser]

Do you honestly think an airline would go broke offering flights (even at a slighty higher cost) that took Canadian routes in order to protect your privacy? .

Yes, without a doubt. I can just go to Buffalo and for one quarter the cost I can fly. Who wouldnt?

And Canadian routes will bankrupt the airline. Not enough flights nor money involved.

[Higgly]

Yes, without a doubt. I can just go to Buffalo and for one quarter the cost I can fly. Who wouldnt?

And Canadian routes will bankrupt the airline. Not enough flights nor money involved.

One quarter? Are you sure? To where? Fargo? In any case, anybody who would drive to Buffalo is already lost anyways, right? How much does it cost you to get to Buffalo and park your car? And then get back after the return leg? And then there is the time it takes, what with the border and all.

I've looked at all this, and I am still flying out of Pearson because the economics just don't work otherwise. And besides, american airlines have terrible on-time records.

Edited October 11, 2007 by Higgly

[M.Dancer]

Yes, without a doubt. I can just go to Buffalo and for one quarter the cost I can fly. Who wouldnt?

And Canadian routes will bankrupt the airline. Not enough flights nor money involved.

Yes. I was watching a US show about airlines and the profits (or losses) they made on certain routes. Somethime a 4 flight would net them less than a $1000. If they encounter headwinds the profits get eaten up quickly...if they are forced to stay grounded because of weather.....etc etc.

the margins on air service are extremely narrow.

[guyser]

One quarter? Are you sure? To where? Fargo? In any case, anybody who would drive to Buffalo is already lost anyways, right? How much does it cost you to get to Buffalo and park your car? And then get back after the return leg? And then there is the time it takes, what with the border and all.

I've looked at all this, and I am still flying out of Pearson because the economics just don't work otherwise. And besides, american airlines have terrible on-time records.

As for one quarter, give me a bit of licence here.

IF we have to make a circuitous route to avoid US airspace then the cost of the CDA flight will soar.

One way to NYC from Buff, it was either $49 or $59.

Are you aware that TO has the highest landing costs in the workd? IIRC , $17,000 per.

Why lost? One hour and a half, add maybe 20 mins at the border (weekday) and I am all done. No customs to go thru at the airport, less congestion and all is good.

I have free parking in Buff anyway and free shuttle. Not every one has that option.

[guyser]

the margins on air service are extremely narrow.

Narrow enough that I have always wondered when 5 people get off a plane...How do they make it?

[Higgly]

As for one quarter, give me a bit of licence here.

IF we have to make a circuitous route to avoid US airspace then the cost of the CDA flight will soar.

One way to NYC from Buff, it was either $49 or $59.

Yes but the issue I was posting about was flights from one Canadian destination to another Canadian destination and flying through US airspace. Say YYZ to YYC.

If you are flying to NYC, then it is their country and it is their rules. No problem.

Did you actually think I was saying there might be an all-Canadian route to get to NYC from To?

Edited October 11, 2007 by Higgly

[maldon_road]

The Minister of Transport has indicated that the US has the legal right to collect this information and that the US and Canada are "in discussions" about it. He also claims that it is through Canadian intervention that Canada-to-Canada flights through US airspace are exempted.

[Higgly]

He also claims that it is through Canadian intervention that Canada-to-Canada flights through US airspace are exempted.

If that's true, then I am happy. If the US wants to collect this info on people flying intot he US, that is their right.

[maldon_road]

If that's true, then I am happy. If the US wants to collect this info on people flying intot he US, that is their right.

Actually flying over the US

[Topaz]

This is nothing new to me, in fact, I reported this was going to happen early this year and some on the board thought I was crazy! The US has to do this and do more security since Bush open up the US to years and years of insecurity!

[Higgly]

Actually flying over the US

If you are saying flying from a destination outside of the US to a destination outside of the US, but over US territory, then I think this is an issue, but aminor one. Every problem has a solution with a $ figure. We'll see how many Cancun tourists want to pay extra to fly around US territory. My guess is most people won't give a damn.

[Wilber]

There are no border check points in the air. Just because an aircraft is flight planned just inside Canadian airspace doesn't stop a high jacker from entering US airspace.

For those who think it is no problem, do you think that if you are flying from Toronto to Delhi that every country you pass over should have your personal information? That could include Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, as well as several of the stans including Pakistan or possibly China depending on the route..

[Wilber]

If the US goes through with this, Canada should demand the same information concerning all US airline flights transiting in Canadian airspace. That would include about 80% of US flights to Europe and Asia. See how many US citizens like giving that info to the Canadian government.

[guyser]

Yes but the issue I was posting about was flights from one Canadian destination to another Canadian destination and flying through US airspace. Say YYZ to YYC.

I had already posted the answer. 1108 am. I saidThey will exclude the planes that dip into the US, think Van to TO

If you are flying to NYC, then it is their country and it is their rules. No problem.

Did you actually think I was saying there might be an all-Canadian route to get to NYC from To?

That is different and was not in discussion. A flight to cancun from TO would not be exempt.

And if you think anyone in the eastern part of Canada will pay the increased cost of flight to Cancun to avoid US airspace....well, sorry, no one will. Have a look at a map.

Toronto-Cancun , this would mean tacking on 4 more hours to get to Vancouver, refeulling , then making a big turn south to Mexico. adding a nother three more hours.

Triple the costs.....you wont pay.Neither will I.

As for what you thought, no I did not. But