Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Invision(INVN)going which way? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (312)	11/29/2001 3:18:39 PM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 558

*INVN Equipment Does Not Work - says Chairman of House Aviation Subcommittee* SHOW: NBC Nightly News DATE: November 23, 2001 BRIAN WILLIAMS, anchor: Earlier this week, the president signed a new law turning airport screeners into federal employees, and they're supposed to get some more backup--more of the bomb detection devices that are already used in some airports. But are these million-dollar machines up to the job? NBC's Shellee Smith reports. SHELLEE SMITH reporting: Every day, thousands of bags are loaded on airplanes across America, and Congress wants each one checked for bombs. Right now, the FAA relies on machines like these that use CAT scan technology to visually dissect the contents inside. But they're big, expensive, about $1 million dollars apiece, and as NBC News has learned, when it comes to finding explosives, experts say they just aren't doing the job. Mr. MIKE BOYD (Aviation Consultant): These machines are nothing more than window dressing. They're great big MRI machines that don't really know what's going through them at times. SMITH: That's because the CT scanning machines don't detect bombs per se; they measure the density of objects. Problem is, things like cheese or chocolate can have the same density as plastic explosives, resulting in too many false alarms. So many false alarms, officials say less than 10 percent of the checked bags are ever screened. Even Congressman John Mica, who chairs the House Aviation Subcommittee, admits we need better equipment. Mr. JOHN MICA: Congress realized they needed to do something. They went out and bought equipment that didn't work. They got into supporting vendor--vendors who produced equipment again that had defects. SMITH: Invision, which makes the machines, says they are reliable and theywork, but researchers across the country are racing to solve the problem. Dr. BOGDAN MAGLICH (Hienergy Microdevices, Inc.): We believe this is the ultimate weapon against terrorism because it can determine chemical formula of anything. SMITH: Working out of a nuclear reactor lab in Irvine, California, Dr. Maglich claims his device can identify explosives hidden in baggage, cocaine camouflaged in rice, even anthrax in a matter of seconds. And at this hi-tech company near Boston, they've developed body scanners that can peer through clothing. Mr. RALPH SHERIDAN (American Science and Engineering): The body search gives you the ability to see hidden explosives under the clothes that wouldn't normally be detected by a metal detector. SMITH: September 11th brought renewed urgency to the question of safety. The FAA just ordered five of Sheridan's body-search machines. And Maglich says they're taking a second look at his supersensor after rejecting his proposal back in 1998. Tragedy opening a door for new ideas that could make flying safer. Shellee Smith, NBC News, Los Angeles.