Catching up on reading after my recent trip overseas Seth's post on "Fear, hope and love" reminded me of the recent experiences in several airports with pre-light security - in the US, France and the UK - and the impression it left one.

In the USA the TSA are taking theatre to a fine art and not really adding much feeling of security. I'm sure they help but they're not making the process of air travel that much more pleasant. On this most recent trip it wasn't too bad. The queues were short (the advantage of flying out early on a Sunday morning I guess) and the inconvenience fairly minimal - laptops out, shoes off but I got to keep my belt on. I was amused to discover that although they confiscate things like nail files it's possibly to buy them in the stores air-side. Maybe they're less dangerous if you just paid a huge markup for them.

In France I was annoyed at the need to re-pass security. I was only using Charles de Gaulle as a transit point - I'd been cleared by the TSA and in secure areas ever since... why did I need clearing again just to board a flight to Heathrow. It wasn't because they don't trust the Americans - the same thing happened to me going the other way as well. It's not like the French are the victims of much in the way of international terrorism (some would argue they are more likely to be the perpetrators!). The queuing area was a little less salubrious and tight for space but the staff were fairly friendly. Laptops, boots and this time belt all had to come off.

The UK seemed to have the most thorough screening process, but it was also the slickest and least disruptive. A spacious feel, good lighting, air conditioning that kept everything from getting hot under the collar created the right atmosphere for the process. Preliminary checks for liquids etc (with plenty of workspace to re-pack your back if needed) ensured the folks carrying a full tube of toothpaste didn't make everyone else wait. The best bit was not having to take my laptop out of the bag at the x-ray machine (keeps the queue flowing, reduces the fear that it's going to get stolen the other side, and reduces the rush to re-pack your bag when you rejoin it after the scan). Belt and boots both had to come off, but only because both have fairly large buckles. Despite the English reputation for taciturn and authoritarian behavior I found my former fellow countrymen to be the least intimidating, yet more reassuring, of the three glimpses of the security machine.

I'd hate to say who is doing most to keep the public safe, and who is having the most positive impact on passenger experience (thought the folks at T2 LHR seem to be ahead in my book) but returning to Seth's point selling hope (I won't go as far as offering airline security "love") rather than fear is the better strategy.

I know we'll never return to the casual travel days of the 1980s but by taking as much care of the branding and experience around security as the airlines do of other aspects of their public face it can certainly become a pleasant and safe experience again.

As someone who spends a fair amount of time traveling the current "security threat" response has had me standing in pointless lines for people to sniff my shoes for explosives.

Almost nothing I see reassures me that I'm any safer flying - in fact, some of the things I see disturb me even more by their sheer hypocrisy - for instance watching an un-scanned, un-xrayed person with carry on luggage go in an exit gate at Seatac recently.

It seems I'm not alone... a recent piece on the NYTimes "The Airport Security Follies" pointed out some of the more obvious flaws and got a pretty positive reaction in the comments... but still politicians need to be seen to be doing something (so they go for obvious high profile stuff, rather than actually making a difference).

Six years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, airport security remains a theater of the absurd. The changes put in place following the September 11th catastrophe have been drastic, and largely of two kinds: those practical and effective, and those irrational, wasteful and pointless.

The first variety have taken place almost entirely behind the scenes. Explosives scanning for checked luggage, for instance, was long overdue and is perhaps the most welcome addition. Unfortunately, at concourse checkpoints all across America, the madness of passenger screening continues in plain view. It began with pat-downs and the senseless confiscation of pointy objects. Then came the mandatory shoe removal, followed in the summer of 2006 by the prohibition of liquids and gels. We can only imagine what is next.

....

How we got to this point is an interesting study in reactionary politics, fear-mongering and a disconcerting willingness of the American public to accept almost anything in the name of “security.” Conned and frightened, our nation demands not actual security, but security spectacle. And although a reasonable percentage of passengers, along with most security experts, would concur such theater serves no useful purpose, there has been surprisingly little outrage. In that regard, maybe we’ve gotten exactly the system we deserve.

more....

I'm planning a trip to the city with one of the best known bridges in the world for customer meetings next week. Part of the planning is logistics around getting to and from airports and hotels.

I don't want to hire a car as it just adds another single vehicle to the commuter chaos and I hate to think what a taxi from SFO to Richmond will cost in rush hour... which leaves me busses and trains (I use public transport whenever I can). The bus didn't really seem like an option but BART will take me pretty much door to door for everywhere I want to go on my trip (the longest walk I've got to look forward is a couple of miles which isn't daunting)

What I love about BART over many cities transport systems is how easy it was to plan a trip. A quick visit to the BART site and I was able to do a web search (including looking up directions to the closest station), download a Windows Mobile version and even set a favorite for Pocket IE so I could check online if I wanted. If I was taking my iPod that's an option as well! The only downside appears to be that Oakland airport isn't that well served but luckily as I couldn't get a flight there at a civilized hour it's not a problem on this trip.

To get walking directions from the station to my hotel I did use Maps.live.com... in this case the driving directions are fine (though sometimes I wish there was an option to optimize for walking from A to B)

I love the fact that these online resources exist, but it's not enough to help get people out of their cars and onto public transport. There needs to be much more of this to make it easy, reliable and predictable for people to easily plan to use public transport.

At home in Redmond I use the busses as often as possible, but I hate the interface - because I don't know the exact location of the bus stop finding where I need to stop and start can be very hit and miss.

There's a real opportunity for the folks at Local.Live.com to really step up and create a mashup of bus and train times, overlay them over their mapping so planning a trip becomes a point and click exercise rather than struggling with a bunch of different services to try and work it out.

I do like the fact that in our local area you can get a rough idea of where the bus actually is but again it would be so much better if it was integrated with a mapping solution so I didn't have to try and work out the closest stop with a transponder!

What's hopeful is that the technology exists - Mashup tools like Popfly and the Silverlight Airlines demo show that smart displays are possible, but what we're waiting for now are the data services to support them and the full circle mashups to consume them and cross the boundaries.