I particularly enjoy the two beverages that they are testing: A bottle of Chateau Petrus and a bottle of Red Bull. Please don’t mix the two. (Petrus? Really??)

One of the biggest problems with the devices right now: The time it takes to scan things is impractical for airport use. And bringing that scan time from 5 minutes to 5 seconds within one year, as the reporter suggests is possible? Don’t hold your breath. 100ml requirements aren’t going anyway anytime soon.

Watch below.

Upgraded, potentially: Star Alliance in Australia
Somewhat surprisingly, Virgin Blue is rumored to be interested in joining Star Alliance. Such a deal, if real, would likely make a pan-global Virgin alliance moot. So much for that theory. But for Star Alliance fans, a Virgin Blue tie-up would really open up a wide range of Australian destinations.

Upgraded, barely: US Airways lifetime status
US Airways has joined its peers and rolled out a lifetime elite level. One-million miles flown on US Airways flights yields only lowest-tier status, with Star Silver status attached. And it’s not even for life — you have to maintain activity at least every three years to retain the status. Pfft. Other airlines offer a much better deal. (Especially AA, among the US-based airlines, which counts all earned miles, and not just flown miles, when calculating million-miler status.) For a nice rundown of the various airlines’ million-miler options, see the Global Traveller’s breakdown.

Downgraded: Venezuelan humor
Unclear if this is truth or fiction, but a flight attendant was allegedly detained by Venezuelan authorities for announcing the time at the destination as “local Chavez time.” Chavez time? “In December 2007, Venezuela created its own time zone, moving the clock back half an hour on a permanent basis, and according to the U.S. embassy report, ‘the crew member was likely trying to remind passengers of this and to suggest they turn their watches back 30 minutes.’”

Upgraded: Contraband
Most of the news regarding TSA lately has been about junk-touching and radiation’s effects on the body, but what about the contents of the bags themselves? Well, according to a recent poll by British airfare aggregator SkyScanner, “a massive 43% of travellers admitted to having smuggled banned items past security staff; 29% had done so by accident, but 14% confessed to smuggling knowingly.”

Upgraded: Biofuels in the real world
Lufthansa is testing a 50-50 blend of traditional jet fuel and biofuel on Airbus A321 runs on the Hamburg-Frankfurt route, beginning April 2011. This isn’t just a one-off test. Been there, done that. This is a weeks-long test in a real-world environment, carrying paying passengers.

Upgraded: Classic airport security cartoons
In a good reminder that frustration with the TSA is nothing new, the New Yorker provides a brief cartoon retrospective mocking airport security. One dates back to 1938. Alas, most are post-9/11.

That’s a big deal.

Delta spokeswoman Susan Elliott said Monday that her airline is issuing refunds on a case-by-case basis for customers worried about the new screening steps. The move, however, does not constitute a new refund policy at the airline.

Their competitors haven’t bit yet. No other airlines are cutting passengers any slack. Perhaps that’s because they (and Delta, actually) aren’t actually raising a red flag yet:

The Delta and American officials said they were not seeing large numbers of cancelations related to the new security checks, but they had no specific numbers.

“I can’t say no one has canceled,” [American Airlines spokesman Tim] Smith said, adding that it’s “just not a trend.”

Hmm. Well, if it’s not a trend, then why is Delta giving anyone any refunds for this reason? …and why are they admitting it to journalists?! I suspect that Delta’s admission is a tell, and that we’ll hear more in coming weeks about how the TSA’s rules are affecting the airlines’ businesses. Not this week — planes are full for the Thanksgiving holiday — and maybe not even in December, as other holiday travel ramps up. But if public anger is still high in January (and it very well could be if changes are slow in coming) then expect to see airlines lobbying to change the TSA gropefest.

Rep. John Mica, the Republican who will soon be chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, is reminding airports that they have a choice.

Mica, one of the authors of the original TSA bill, has recently written to the heads of more than 150 airports nationwide suggesting they opt out of TSA screening.

Opt out of TSA screening? Great tagline, and yes, it’s possible: “The 2001 law creating the TSA gave airports the right to opt out of the TSA program in favor of private screeners after a two-year period.”

Unfortunately, it’s not quite that simple. Opting out is actually called the “Screening Partnership Program,” but you’re not rid of the TSA just by asking them to leave. Sure, they may fire the federal screeners, but airports still have to maintain the TSA’s standards, procedures, and policies, even if the actual workers doing the screenings aren’t federal employees. So, from a traveler’s perspective, it’s a complete and utter wash.

So who has opted out already?

There are seventeen airports participating in a Screening Partnership Program: San Francisco International Airport, Kansas City International Airport, Greater Rochester International Airport, Sioux Falls Regional Airport, Jackson Hole Airport, Tupelo Regional Airport, Key West International Airport, Charles M. Schultz-Sonoma County Airport, Roswell Industrial Air Center, Havre, Lewistown, Sidney-Richland (SDY), MT, Glasgow, Wolf Point, Glendive, Miles City and E. 34th Street Heliport (6N5), NY.

The biggest player is obviously San Francisco, which joined the SPP in November 2006. I’ve flown to and through SFO in that time, though admittedly not in about a year, but never noticed anything out of the ordinary at the time.

But at the end of the day, don’t let the rhetoric fool you. Yes, an opt-out provision exists for airports, but you’ll still be subject to TSA-mandated security techniques. Prepare for your groping, even at an airport that has opted out.

But the most widespread travel discussions here in the US have been over the full-body screenings by TSA officials, and the opt-out option of a full-body groping, including breasts and genitalia.

Public polling of the American electorate still shows widespread support for the heightened screenings, but that support is in the abstract. Ask again in six months, when more passengers have flown and experienced it for themselves. Ask again when limiting the sample size to actual travelers. And ask yourself, why are we doing this in the first place?

Is the scan-or-grope policy leading to increased safety, or is it an instantly-obsolete defense that will easily and immediately be defeated?

I submit that, at this point, I actually think the TSA checkpoints themselves, and not the aircraft in the secure area, may be the riskiest spots in the airport. This isn’t a commentary on the radiation, the groping, or the searches and seizures, at least not directly. But don’t let it be a surprise to you if those TSA checkpoints are going to be the real targets soon.

I fear that checkpoints will be a viable target for both al Qaeda-esque “chaos villains” who want to disrupt the flow of normal travel life, and for anti-government McVeigh-esque self-styled patriots looking to make a statement against the perceived overreach of the government agency. Either depraved act would have a chilling effect on travel, and more importantly on an already fearful society.

As we harden the security perimeter, and as long as the motivations of terrorists persist, we increase the likelihood that an attack will be attempted in, say, the area prior to security, where crowds are dense and scanning hasn’t yet taken place. Or where cargo is stored (and barely checked). This is the fundamental weakness of the increased intrusiveness, spearheaded by expensive investments in equipment over intelligence. Technology and intrusive groping techniques won’t end up preventing attacks; they’ll just force the threat to move to another location, likely merely steps away.

It’s the Maginot Line of travel. After World War I, the French military built a series of fortified bunkers to protect themselves from the eventual next German invasion. The fortifications took a decade to build and cost a fortune. They were impressive, and indeed, the Germans didn’t attack the line head-on. Instead, they found a weakness and went around it, driving deep into France within five days. I see the constant escalation in airport security technology in the same way. Lots of fanfare, enormous spend, but easily circumvented by a dedicated attacker.

I don’t envy the TSA agents who do their jobs, as they face down the anger and frustration of a long stream of innocent people who are stripped of their dignity in order to be transported from point A to point B. Now it’s appropriate to worry about them becoming targets.

Upgraded: Inflight wi-fi on Southwest
Southwest is (finally) getting on the inflight wifi train (err, or plane…) and their price will be a relatively low $5 per connection, regardless of flight duration/distance or device used to connect.

Upgraded: Passion for AirTran’s first class seats
Fans of AirTran, which is being taken over by Southwest, have set up a website devoted to saving the first class seats that AirTran frequent fliers have grown accustomed to. Join the resistance at AirTranSOS.com.

Upgraded: Your cellphone as a key
The Clarion Hotel in Stockholm is the first hotel to install a cellphone-based room lock/key system. It’s a limited rollout, for starters. In theory, you’ll be able to check in by phone and walk straight to your room, bypassing the front desk, and avoiding the need for a room key. Neat, if it works.

Upgraded: Back-channel efforts to change our security theater
If existing efforts to change TSA policy have failed — and if the policy itself has continuously gotten worse for travelers — then perhaps a back-channel effort to effect change may be in order. Reader Ed sends in this open letter to the CEO of the Walt Disney Company. The letter-writer, Arthur Krolman, argues that Disney is tacitly endorsing TSA policy, and is thereby supporting the “nude photography or inspection of private parts” of children. Ouch. Will Disney take the bait ?…

(image)

Jeffrey Goldberg gets the lowdown. And I mean low down.

In part because of the back-scatter imager’s invasiveness (a TSA employee in Miami was arrested recently after he physically assaulted a colleague who had mocked his modestly sized penis, which was fully apparent in a captured back-scatter image), the TSA is allowing passengers to opt-out of the back-scatter and choose instead a pat-down. I’ve complained about TSA pat-downs in the past, because they, too, were more security theater than anything else. They are, as I would learn, becoming more serious, as well.

“[...] starting tomorrow, we’re going to start searching your crotchal area” — this is the word he used, “crotchal” — and you’re not going to like it.”

“What am I not going to like?” I asked.

“We have to search up your thighs and between your legs until we meet resistance,” he explained.

“Resistance?” I asked.

“Your testicles,” he explained.

“That’s funny,” I said, “because ‘The Resistance’ is the actual name I’ve given to my testicles.”

Go read the whole thing. And the sequel. Then you can make a more informed decision as to whether or not to opt out of the backscatter.

Upgraded: Canada’s Via Rail
Via, the Canadian national railway, is updating its cars, with the first new-and-improved sleeping cars and dining cars going into service between Toronto and Vancouver. More comfort on long-haul trains is always a plus.

Upgraded: Your ears
Your ears may soon be a part of your security screening. You read that right: Ears are a biologically unique marker, and as such, may be included in your biometric profile for international travel. If researchers at the University of Southampton in the UK convince global governments, you too, may soon be identified at passport control by way of your ears. (via @elliottdotorg)

Upgraded: Burnin’ rubber
Reader Jeff sends in a video of an Airbus A340-600 brake test. It’s not quite riveting at first, but in the second half of the video, overheated brakes and tires start blowing up, catching on fire, and creating general havoc. I’m not sure if the video is comforting or not. On the one hand, there’s a lot of time between the time the time the brakes are hit and the time the flames start spewing out, meaning there’s a lot of time to evacuate. On the other hand, what the hell are these Airbus staffers doing!? The repeated expressions of “Merde!” aren’t exactly the sign of a plan coming together:

(Thanks Jeff! via the Presurfer)

“In the next two years (the ban) will end,” ICAO Secretary General Raymond Benjamin told AFP ahead of the UN organization’s 37th general assembly, which kicks off in Montreal on Tuesday.

New equipment capable of detecting explosives in water bottles, makeup kits or toothpaste tubes, for example, would be installed at most airport security checkpoints by 2012, he explained.

This timeframe is more aggressive than the timeline the European Union has set for the lifting of the ban, the very-specific date of April 29, 2013:

By 29 April 2013 at the latest, all liquids will be allowed in cabin baggage and will be screened. By that date, the current restrictions on the carriage of liquids in cabin baggage will end. The transition period until 2013 is necessary to allow for a roll-out of liquids screening equipment at all EU airports.

As a preliminary step in phasing out the restrictions on liquids, as from 29 April 2011 at the latest, duty-free liquids purchased at third country airports or on board third country airlines and carried in tamper evident bags will be allowed as cabin baggage and will be screened. Today, these liquids are only allowed in cabin baggage if they come from selected third countries (United States, Canada, Singapore and Croatia).

Unfortunately, it will apparently take a little more convincing (or lobbying) to get the DHS and TSA on board with that timetable:

[U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet] Napolitano told The Associated Press she’s surprised by International Civil Aviation Organization Secretary General Raymond Benjamin’s remarks that security equipment in most airports will allow for the ban to be lifted soon.

Napolitano said the technology isn’t ready.

“I think that’s premature,” Napolitano said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Sigh. It feels like we’ve made so little progress in the world since 2006. Back in 2008, there were liquid bomb testers in Japanese airports, and we still don’t see them in the US or Europe.

However, the fact that the ICAO is publicly making statements pertaining to a timeline for phase-out is strangely encouraging. I know the ICAO has no jurisdiction over the screening of passengers at airports, but the transportation and security leaders of forty governments attended their last conference. This isn’t a bunch of crackpots, and the leaders didn’t fall off the turnip truck.

Let’s revisit this in two years, to see if we’re really any closer to lifting the ban. Until then, continue using your 3-1-1 freedom baggies.