High Flying Security
Focusing on the perimeter equally as important as the front gate
- By Patricia Logue
- Jan 01, 2012
There are not many topics that can invoke more mass fear in the general
public than threats against major U.S. airports. As portrayed
in the media and the average traveler’s mind, the primary threat lies
inside the terminal where security officials are constantly on high
alert for concealed weapons, explosives and other banned materials.
Conversely, as airport officials are aware, there is another and perhaps more apparent
threat at airports.
The Airport Perimeter
Strengthening perimeter security at airports provides a solid foundation for
protection of lives and continuity of operations. As threats against airports
continue to evolve, airport perimeter security requires constant evaluation for
appropriate response planning, as well as enhanced surveillance and security
technologies available.
Commercial airports are one of the major hubs of U.S. transportation. The
Federal Aviation Administration classifies 546 airports as “commercial service”
airports. The top 10 U.S. airlines operate more than 400,000 commercial flights
each month and more than 30,000 commercial flights each day.
Most U.S. airports, runways and terminals were built decades ago, when security
requirements were immensely unlike those needed today. Since 9/11, installing
networked surveillance systems, including long- and short-range radars, thermal
imaging cameras and video monitoring, has proven to be the most comprehensive
way to detect intruders, unauthorized vehicles and low-flying aircraft to preserve
human life and provide continuity of operations.
Current State of Perimeter Security
Today’s modern airports have become self-contained urban-esque “cities,” with
roadways, passages, buildings and myriad of intertwined pedestrians and vehicles.
Combine that with the reality that no two airport perimeters are alike; each has
unique borders, including roads, rural areas, waterways, coastlines and urban borders.
This presents a distinctive security and surveillance challenge to ensure the
safety of the “city.”
The role of any perimeter security system is the perimeter fence and the perimeter
intrusion detection system (PIDS) with its response mechanism, together
acting as the first level of site protection.
Unprotected perimeters mean unprotected assets, unprotected people, and, inevitably,
security breaches. The most commonly used perimeter security measure
at airports, even since Sept. 11, 2001, are fence lines, fence alarms and mobile security
vehicles monitoring the various boundaries, which have been easily breached
in several instances in the past decade. Any security system is only as strong as its
weakest link. The smart intruders rarely defeat the sensors or PIDS. Instead, they
rely on poor alarm response procedures and mechanisms—the human element—
to avoid getting caught.
For example, in 2009, the driver of a suspected stolen truck led police on a wild
chase on the tarmac of the Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix, Ariz., after the vehicle
penetrated airfield security by crashing through two chain-link perimeter fences
and weaving between planes. The vehicle was seen driving up alongside loaded
commercial jets in the process of taxiing for take-off. As the driver was taken into
custody, authorities scrambled to figure out how he managed to simply drive onto
the sensitive tarmac area, which is dotted with billions of dollars worth of aircraft
and hundreds of people.
During the summer of 2004, a driver swerved his car off the perimeter road,
penetrated a cyclone fence and found himself inside the secure perimeter of Midway
Airport in Chicago, Ill. This was an accident. If that driver, or the driver of
the stolen truck in Phoenix, had been a terrorist with a truckload of explosives and
had headed for the terminal building, an airplane loaded with fuel, or the airport
fuel farm, results would have been tragic.
In August 2010, Australian authorities investigated a security breach at Melbourne
Airport. The intruder climbed a barbwire fence completely undetected before
dawn on July 24, into the “airside” security area, and then walked to the Virgin Blue hanger. He then pulled on a pair of
staff overalls, stole a vehicle and drove
for some time within the secure area of
the airport that encompasses the landing
strip and terminal areas before being
noticed and arrested.
Airport perimeter security is primarily
the responsibility of airport operators,
so without federal regulations, each
airport is left determining its own security
needs. Until mandated or legislated
by government, or becoming a victim of
a security breach themselves, many commercial
airports will continue to limit
their perimeter security to patrolling security
guards and a fence line.
Surveillance and Security
Options: What to Look For,
What’s Available
Airport security staff have an unenviable
job; they must not only be aware
that a security breach has occurred but
must be able to quickly assess the threat
level, immediately implement an emergency
response plan and continually
monitor threat movement.
A PIDS’s main goal is to detect
threats, deter threats, assess situations
and implement appropriate action. As
stated above, the most universal perimeter
security at airports is the installation
of fence and gate systems and
fence alarms.
Though they are a critical first deterrent,
there are several problems with
fence and fence alarm systems as the
main source for airport security. The
first issue is when a fence alarm sounds,
the security breach has already occurred;
the second issue is fence alarms
are prone to false alarms (i.e., animals,
wind, human error); the third problem
is no video tracking or continual monitoring
of the situation.
These issues present challenges from
a response standpoint. Before an appropriate
emergency response plan can
be implemented, airport security officials
need more information in order to
react appropriately; they need to know
what type of threat has occurred, from
what direction the threat is coming
and what direction it is headed and if
lives are in immediate jeopardy. Meanwhile,
they must constantly monitor the
threat. While fences and fence alarms
are important in threat deterrence, they
are not a stand-alone solution.
The last decade has seen new and
substantial advancement in PIDS
technologies, increasing the reliability
and accuracy of probability of detection
(POD), lowering the number of
nuisance and false alarms, and greatly
improving their performance (differentiating
between intruders and environmental
disturbances).
Implementing a multilayered defense
PIDS program is the optimal approach
to deterring outside threats, preserving
assets and ensuring uninterrupted
operations. Every airport should have
a comprehensive threat analysis that
identifies the nature and appropriate
response for potential threats. Ideally,
a 360-degree comprehensive perimeter
coverage to rapidly identify and assess
threats is needed. An effective system
should include a combination of sensors,
CCTV cameras, thermal imagers,
all-weather radars and appropriate
detection strategies for the terrain and potential threats. Thought must be given
to response strategies, including the
appropriate agency; airport security,
local law enforcement, and firefighter
notifications should be integrated into a
Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) system.
Multiple responders require access
to a central command and control center,
which can be challenging both technologically
and procedurally. Thought
must be given to data dissemination
and transmission technologies for first
responders and methods for establishing
a clear chain of command.
Being able to use networked surveillance
systems, including long- and
short-range radars, thermal imaging
cameras and video monitoring, is the
most comprehensive solution to detect
intruders, unauthorized vehicles and
unidentified aircraft at large U.S. airports,
but small airports need perimeter
protection, too. One of the most deadly
intruders at small airports is wildlife.
Deer, coyote, geese and other wildlife
are the source of many accidents and
could potentially be thwarted with the
proper technology. Thermal imagers
are particularly effective in detection
of wildlife on airport grounds and can
effectively be used as a warning to air
traffic. Virtual access can provide airport
operators with interrogation capabilities
from offsite locations for remote
airports that are unstaffed during certain
periods of their operations.
The Port Authority of New
York/New Jersey Airports
The New York Port Authority Airports
have a unique challenge of water borders,
land borders and fence lines to
protect from intrusion and ever-changing
outside threats, as well as being the
“center of the universe” for international
and domestic travel.
Keeping these issues at the forefront,
the port embarked on a project
to install integrated security and surveillance
systems, providing 360-degree
surveillance capability at the four airports
in its PIDS program. With a suite
of cameras and surveillance systems
installed around the four airports under
the port authority’s jurisdiction, all
of the information is fed real-time to a
series of command and control centers
around the airports for 24/7 monitoring
and response assessment.
Where are We Headed? What
should we Look Out For?
Global social and political instability
with the ongoing threat of terrorism
will continue to drive the need to
both fund and enforce regulation and
legislation regarding perimeter security
at U.S commercial airports, as well as
at nuclear power stations, water reservoirs,
data centers, transportation hubs
and historic landmarks.
Legislation will continue to play a
major role in the growth of perimeter
security equipment along with stimulus
monies and other regulation. Research
estimates that global spending on electronic
perimeter security equipment
will reach $402 million in 2011, a 5 percent
increase over 2010.
This article originally appeared in the January 2012 issue of Security Today.