Advertisement

Telematic Support of Baggage Security Control at the Airport

  • Jacek Skorupski
  • Piotr Uchroński
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 471)

Abstract

A key element of baggage security control at the airport is a human - the security screener. He/she performs some of the tasks remotely, and is supported by the telematic system, making the x-ray baggage screening. The aim of this paper was to analyze the dependence of the number of errors on the experience and the frequency of virtual threat images projection (TIP). The study was based on measurements under real conditions at the Katowice-Pyrzowice International Airport. In the framework of this research two basic types of errors made by security screeners were identified. The results show that the number of errors is dependent from both the experience and the frequency of the stimulus, represented by TIP images. As a result, it was possible to determine the boundary level of experience that entitles security screener to independent work. Also the recommended frequency of threat images projections was determined.

Keywords

telematic support security control baggage screening airport system operator’s errors air transport safety and security 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bazargan, M., Guzhva, V.S.: Impact of gender, age and experience of pilots on general aviation accidents. Accident Analysis & Prevention 43(3), 962–970 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Butler, V., Poole, R.W.: Rethinking Checked Baggage Screening, Policy Study 297, Reason Public Policy Institute (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Feng, Q., Sahin, H., Kapur, K.C.: Designing airport checked-baggage-screening strategies considering system capability and reliability. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 94, 618–627 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Flitton, G., Breckon, T.P., Megherbi, N.: A comparison of 3D interest point descriptors with application to airport baggage object detection in complex CT imagery. Pattern Recognition 46, 2420–2436 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fruhen, L.S., et al.: Safety intelligence: An exploration of senior managers’ characteristics. Applied Ergonomics 45(4), 967–975 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gerstenfeld, A., Berger, P.D.: A decision-analysis approach for optimal airport security. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection 4(1), 14–21 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gkritza, K., Niemeier, D., Mannering, F.: Airport security screening and changing passenger satisfaction: An exploratory assessment. Journal of Air Transport Management 12(5), 213–219 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kirschenbaum, A., et al.: Trusting technology: Security decision making at airports. Journal of Air Transport Management 25, 57–60 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Le Coze, J.C.: What have we learned about learning from accidents? Post-disasters reflections. Safety Science 51(1), 441–453 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malakis, S., Kontogiannis, T., Kirwan, B.: Managing emergencies and abnormal situations in air traffic control (part I): Taskwork strategies. Applied Ergonomics 41(4), 620–627 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Malakis, S., Kontogiannis, T., Kirwan, B.: Managing emergencies and abnormal situations in air traffic control (part II): Teamwork strategies. Applied Ergonomics 41(4), 628–635 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Michel, S., Mendes, M., Schwaninger, A.: Can the difficulty level reached in computer-based training predict the results in x-ray image interpretation tasks? In: 2010 International IEEE Carnahan Conference on Security Technology, pp. 146–155 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schwaninger, A., Hardmeier, D., Hofer, F.: Measuring visual abilities and visual knowledge of aviation security screeners. In: 38th Annual IEEE International Carnahan Conference Security Technology, pp. 258–264 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Skorupski, J., Uchroński, P.: Rozmyty model oceny urządzeń systemu kontroli bagażu w porcie lotniczym. In: Skorupski, J. (ed.) Współczesne problemy inżynierii ruchu lotniczego– modele i metody, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej, Warszawa, pp.113–130 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Skorupski, J., Uchroński, P.: A fuzzy system for evaluation of baggage screening devices at an airport, European Safety and Reliability Conference, Wrocław (in press, 2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stroeve, S.H., Sharpanskykh, A., Kirwan, B.: Agent-based organizational modelling for analysis of safety culture at an air navigation service provider. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 96(5), 515–533 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang, T., Chuang, L.: Psychological and physiological fatigue variation and fatigue factors in aircraft line maintenance crews. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 44(1), 107–113 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wales, A., Halbherr, T., Schwaninger, A.: Using speed measure to predict performance in x-ray luggage screening tasks. In: 43rd Annual Carnahan Conference on Security Technology, pp. 212–215 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wells, K., Bradley, D.A.: A review of X-ray explosives detection techniques for checked baggage. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 70, 1729–1746 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wetter, O.E.: Imaging in airport security: Past, present, future, and the link to forensic and clinical radiology. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging 1(4), 152–160 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacek Skorupski
    • 1
  • Piotr Uchroński
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of TransportWarsaw University of TechnologyPoland
  2. 2.Upper Silesian Aviation GroupPoland

Personalised recommendations