# 3 Bomb-Sniffing Dogs at Philadelphia Airport Fail Test



## Patrick Murray (Mar 27, 2006)

To you detector folks, how common is it for dogs to fail their certification tests? I hope these airport bomb dogs are being tested on a regular basis to make sure they don't miss. 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582318,00.html

*3 Bomb-Sniffing Dogs at Philadelphia Airport Fail Test *

Wednesday, January 06, 2010










Print
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://w.sharethis.com/widget/?tabs=email%2Cweb&charset=utf-8&services=digg%2Cfacebook%2Cmyspace%2Cdelicious%2Cstumbleupon%2Ctechnorati%2Cgoogle_bmarks%2Cyahoo_bmarks%2Cyahoo_myweb%2Cwindows_live%2Cfriendfeed%2Cnewsvine%2Cmixx%2Cfurl%2Cmagnolia%2Creddit&style=rotate&publisher=ccd2a158-6cce-4bbc-afa8-1d2dc62fe84c&headerbg=%23c9cad4&linkfg=%230f0fa9&embeds=true" _extended="true"></SCRIPT>ShareThis
*PHILADELPHIA — Three bomb-sniffing dogs assigned by the federal Transportation Security Administration to inspect cargo at Philadelphia International Airport failed recent recertification tests, according to a congressman who wants the dogs replaced.*
U.S. Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pa., calls the situation "totally ridiculous."
TSA spokesman Greg Soule says the agency cannot confirm how many dogs are assigned to an airport or their status. But he says the rigorous nature of the yearly cerification tests means that some teams may need to go through remedial programs. He says in the meantime other security measures are used to keep passengers safe.
Brady says the agency should immediately send new dogs while the others are being recertified.
The TSA says 700 canine teams are in air, marine and mass transportation systems across the nation.
<SCRIPT language=javascript src="/js/news_showNext.js" _extended="true"></SCRIPT>


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

TSA, arguably, has the most difficult certification among all the certification agencies. It's really a tough test. There is always a few failures. They don't depend on "paid" membership. 

DFrost


----------



## Mo Earle (Mar 1, 2008)

I know when Keith recently certified with Tango for bomb detection-the test was tough, they were tested on boats, in buildings,in parking lots etc....they could not have any misses, zero on the bomb detection side...where the drug cert. was allowed to have a miss- it is good it is so strict, it could save/risk people's lives.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Look at this as a good thing. The dogs/handlers aren't getting "gimmies" for their certification by unqualifyed testers. 
The TSA SHOULD be tough!


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Look at this as a good thing. The dogs/handlers aren't getting "gimmies" for their certification by unqualifyed testers.
> The TSA SHOULD be tough!


TSA is no gimmee, they really are a tough certification. USPCA, NAPWDA, IPWDA and the other alphabet organizations are no match. I've conducted the TSA's predecessor (FAA) evals for several years. The failure rate was around 15%. I don't know what it is now and they aren't going to say. There is a scramble going on for "top dog" in the law enforcement explosives detection world. ATF wants to be the top dog, but the other major players -- TSA (by far the largest) DOD, Secret Service etc aren't going to let them and that has their panties in a wad. ha ha. Too much to go into, but it's funny to watch when you don't have an axe to grind. 

DFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Look at this as a good thing. The dogs/handlers aren't getting "gimmies" for their certification by unqualifyed testers.
> The TSA SHOULD be tough!


Hey Bob

I just wish the human TSA employees were as hard working and reliable as the canines are


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Hey Bob
> 
> I just wish the human TSA employees were as hard working and reliable as the canines are


 
That's just the "human" nature of government workers.


----------

