Real life pilots and Airline Industry folks: Let them know!

[Toad]

Eagler think about it.

"Short haul" traffic is vital to the airlines. Call "short haul" the 1.5 hour flights.

OK, you want EL AL screening on that. Tell the folks to be at the airport @ 5 hours early because at a big place like Atlanta, there's LOTS of people to screen.

Now figure a 1.5 hour flight is about 600 miles or so. Generally speaking you can drive that in 9 hours or so.

Now, do you take your own car and drive 9 hours which will be much cheaper and you'll go on your own schedule and have a car when you get there...

Or do you wait in line 5 hours for a 1.5 flight, pay a LOT more, go on someone else's schedule and have to rent a car when you get there?

Long haul would not be affected nearly as much.

"the pilot aka Clint Eastwood comes barrelling out of the cockpit"

New security procedures are in effect. They aren't being generally spread around but I doubt if there's anyone left who hasn't heard we're not coming out of the cockpit for ANY reason anymore. Well, maybe you didn't hear it.    Hell, even trips to the lav are minimized to the point of pain now.

So, your scenario falls apart right there.

Were this law to pass and were trained pilots allowed to be armed, any shooting would be done from the cockpit at someone coming through the very narrow door, using the Glaser slugs.

Generally, the expected scenario is that IN A TERRORIST/HIJACK incident, one pilot flies the aircraft directly to the nearest suitable runway as fast as possible. The other pilot half turns in his seat and simply covers the door.

If the security of the door is breached.. then there would probably be shots fired. At least that's what they are discussing in the training scenarios.


As for your "incredible hulks" idea, there were 100 Sky Marshals on the job on Sept. 11. I heard they were turning out a class a week now... 10 to a class. They'll probably ramp up above that.

Still, figure a minimum of 6000 flights a day by 150+ seat aircraft.  It'll be a while... like forever.

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

[MiG Eater]

Originally posted by SOB:
I still think arming pilots is a horrible idea.  Unless you now want to make it part of a pilot's required skills to be able to handle a gun and be willing to use it when the need arises.

SOB

Would the military pilot who is trained to handle a 9mm Baretta M92 and fly a KC-10 be any different than an ex-military pilot currently flying a DC-10?  How about ANG pilots that fly fully armed F-16's and F-15's on weekends then fly for the commercial airlines during the week?  Are they not capable of being trusted with a weapon?  The vast majority of pilots are fast learners and certainly capable of handling a weapon as well as maintaining proficiency at the extreme close ranges where a potential situation could occur.

Airline pilots will never be responsible for storming the main cabin in the event of a terrorist takeover.  They do have the practical, personal, and moral responsibility to prevent unauthorized entry into the flight deck.  A simple bar across a 1/4" thick door won't be enough to prevent a highly determined person from gaining access.  

Airline pilots, for years, were allowed to carry weapons if they so desired.  It wasn't until the mid 90's when they were banned from the cockpits.  SOB, I think you highly under-rate the people charged with the care of several hundred passengers on an airliner.  You may feel personally uneasy but they are highly capable individuals that will go to great lengths to protect their passengers and crew.  If you are on an airplane, you are already trusting them with your life.  If it meant mandetory training should they wish to carry a firearm in the flightdeck, most would gladly take the time to get it done.

MiG

[Creamo]

Your missing one crucial point MIG. A newly reinforced barred door wont keep a determined man out, but it will make a hell of a lot of noise, and take time to breach. Enough time in fact to have the 60 or 100 or 180 to  passengers on board subdue the attacker, not to mention a paranoid now pissed off F/O with a Crash Axe. Kinda like the recent Chicago AA flight where the insane man muttered something about the Sears Tower and tried to take over the plane. Even without a reinforced door, he was quickly put into submission by the passengers and crew and put in a looney bin. (or they could have shot him I guess, cheaper in the long run)

All this is mute anyway. The French build a massive wall of awesome defense to keep the Germans out, so the Germans just found a different way to attack and go around. The terrorists will do the same thing. The plane as a bomb will never work again, and they know it. Yet out of fear, people will write their congressmen, demand everyone else that is a paranoid bag of nerves to for example cripple the airline industry with unacceptable regulations, false security measures, and many other things that are detrimental to the industry. Golly-geen folks, get out there and fly.

Terrorism is about forcing one to change the way they live by instilling fear. Terrorism is fear. You change your everyday freedoms out of fear. You change how you live by fear.

diddly em, Im not afraid. Too bad so many people are.

[SOB]

MiG...I don't doubt that there are plenty of pilots that are up to the job of responsibly handling a weapon and even plenty who would be willing to fire it when the need arose, and wouldn't go "John Wayne" in the face of an emergency.  But what about the ones who aren't up to the task?  Do they get canned?  Do they simply get the training regardless of their beliefs or abilities, and then are expected to do the job regardless?

I just think it's a pointless risk that isn't needed.


SOB

[Toad]

SOB, as far as I've heard discussed, it would be a voluntary situation. Train or not, individual option.

Captain would retain the right to set the ROE for his aircraft (ie allow or disallow arms.)

All very speculative right now with no definite plans/ideas. It's simply in the open discussion stage. I doubt it will get past the discussion stage unless the House passes the Senate provision that allows arming. Then there will be serious discussion in the industry.

There's lots of discussion in the ready rooms, of course. More in favor than not, I'd guess. Most of us qualified with handguns during our military career, so there's a familiarity with the process rather than a fear of the unknown.

Those in favor view it as the last chance/worst case way to save the aircraft before the Air Guard puts an AIM-9 or two up your rear. Those against pretty much figure the threat will never reach the cockpit again, given the new awareness.

Pay your money, take your choice of analysis.

[SOB]

Heh, I'll pay my money and take whatever they give me.  I'm sure I'll be flying for a long time to come either way.  


SOB

[Wobble]

I think, in general it will be much harder for ANY hijecer, no matter how well armed to take over a plane... because as soon as the passengers realize what is happening.. the first thing that will shoot through their mind is those planes shooting through those buildings.. and you KNOW there will be PLENTY of them thinking "well.. im gonna die anyway.. FUGGIT.. im gettin this bastard first!"

the next hijacking will last about 10 seconds and the perpetrator will look like one of those people who catches a home run at a yanks game in about .5 seconds..

I guarntee you it wont be long before some hijacker gets beaten to death by the other passengers.

[Creamo]

Actually Hobbled, passengers in fact KILLED a guy not too long ago.

I've not the patience to find it, but he was a strong young dude that flipped out.

 After head-butting a off duty cop trying to subdue him and smashing his nose, other passengers held him on the floor until landing.

They were very pissed and they applied so much pressure he suffocated and died.

People applauded when he was drug off the plane.

Horrible I know.

All pre-WTC as well.

[Toad]

This was in my E-Mail this morning. It didn't say NOT to spread it around, so I just took out the names of the folks involved.

I post it as I got it, without comment other than the Edits.


**************


Subject: Fwd: American Air Cockpit scare

All - Well here is weird coincidence! I just had the Captain of the
American Airlines incident in my airplane as a jumpseater. On the same day
that the incident occcured... <Personal Details (Names) Edited Out - Toad>

I got a chance to speak to him at  
length in my cockpit and although he was still pretty flustered he had some
good information to pass on. My F/O <EDIT> can verify or answer any
questions on this subject as well.

INCIDENT: (that made national news on  Monday Oct 8)- A crazed passenger broke through the cockpit door and into an American Airlines 767 cockpit and attacked the pilots, inducing a temporary  aircraft dive. 8 passengers subdued the passenger after dragging him out of the cockpit.

REMARKS TO ME FROM CAPT. <EDIT>:

1) Somehow the nut knew which guy in the cockpit was the Captain, and he slugged and generally wailed away on the Captain, not the F/O. There was about a 5-10 second period when Capt. <EDIT> was being struck repeatedly, that he wasn't sure if he and the F/O would prevail.

2) He felt he prevailed because the F/O got out of his seat, put his feet
against the center console for leverage, and pushed the guy backwards and
neutralized him until the passengers showed up.

3) It took 8 passengers in addition to the F/O to get the guy out of the
cockpit and then flex-cuff him.

4) Capt. <EDIT> and I discussed jump seat deployment and although it was not
a factor in his 767, it was generally agreed that if that same scenario had
occured in my 737 with the jumpseat down, I would have been toast, because
the guy was an absolute lunatic and was diving everywhere and would have
gotten over that jumpseat in about 1 second. Had that happened, Capt. <EDIT>
acknowlegded that it would have been near impossible to get him out because
of the guy's incredible strength. He also felt that his F/O being able to
get out of his seat and push the guy, saved the airplane (with the jump seat
down, in the 737, the F/O cannot get up and respond to an intruder).

5) During the scuffle he remembers wishing he had some type of weapon.

6) He is very thankful the guy did not have a knife or razor, or else the
outcome would have been worse.

7) The guy broke the flexcuffs with his incredible strength after they had
been put on his wrists, which is nearly impossible to do, and shows how
crazed these people are.

8) F-16's were scrambled to "escort" him to ORD after his MAYDAY call. Capt.
<EDIT> was not aware that the F-16's were behind him all the way to ORD, and
it was chilling to him to realize that one wrong turn and he may have been
shot down. He feels that he was intentionally not told of the presence of
the F-16's.

9) He is going to take alot of time off before he goes back to work. Capt.
<EDIT> feels that the best response to a cockpit intruder is an F/O who is on
his feet and opposing the intruder. I agree and on my airplane my jumpseat
stays up, regardless of directives.

Be careful out there.

[ 10-19-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

[Ripsnort]

Interesting reading Toad.

[Eagler]

Airline Arming Pilots With Tasers

Mesa Air Group Inc. will train its pilots to carry non-lethal taser weapons in the cockpit in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration, the company announced Thursday.

A taser is a stun gun that fires a high voltage shock at a range of up to 15 feet. It leaves the attacker in a dazed state.

"We need to do everything we can to regain the confidence of our passengers in order to insure the future of commercial aviation," said Jonathan Ornstein, Mesa's chairman and chief executive officer. "We believe that enhancing on-board security will go a long way toward reaching that goal."

Ornstein said the company began placing trained security personnel on its Mesa Airlines operation out of its Albuquerque, N.M., hub on Wednesday.

Mesa Airlines operates 116 aircraft with 832 daily departures to 153 cities in 38 states, Canada and Mexico.

It operates America West Express, US Airways Express and Midwest Express.

-- UPI

[Ghosth]

Question on the tazer issue.

If a pilot pulls a gun & a 9mm slug goes off into the cockpit in a worst case scenario how much of the planes electrical system could be effected?

Same scenario for a tazer?

Speaking for myself I'd rather see the pilots with a 9mm on their hip than a tazer. I could be wrong but it seems to me that the chances for major catestrophic electrical failure would be much higher with a tazer.

Course they could always issue pilots with sawed off .410 shotguns with birdshot. A single shot is deadly at close range but I bet it wouldn't penetrate the hull.

[Toad]

Another E-Mail that just came in...


*********

Maybe we shouldn't be so confident that things are really going to change.

Maybe we shouldn't pat ourselves on the back quite so heartily as we tell ourselves that now we truly understand the severity of the dangers, and now we are willing to sacrifice our free-and-easy way of living in the name of protecting our society.

Why should we remain a little skeptical, even in these terrible days?

Consider this.

Diane M. Kezerle, a secretary with the Arthur Andersen accounting firm, was
doing some research on a personal project at the Joliet Public Library, near her home.

She was going through some microfilmed copies of the Joliet Herald-News --
the item she was looking for was in the paper of Sunday, Sept. 27, 1970.

As she was looking at the old film of the newspaper, she noticed another story, near the one she was interested in. The headline of this unrelated story caught her eye:

"Bulletproof Cockpit Doors Asked to Thwart Hijackers."

The story, written by the Copley News Service, had a Washington dateline.
Remember, this was 1970.

It began:

"Airline pilots have demanded bulletproof cockpit doors and bulkheads to
thwart would-be aerial hijackers."

The story reported that Charles Ruby, president of the Airline Pilots
Association, had written to the Federal Aviation Administration asking for
"action now" to protect passengers and flight crews. He said what was needed
were bulletproof partitions separating the cockpits from the cabins, bulletproof doors with electromagnetic locks, bulletproof windows, and a sliding panel in the cockpit doors so pilots could use defensive devices.

The news story said that "almost every incident of air violence has seen a
demand to enter the flight deck and to confer with the captain." By making
it impossible, or at least extremely difficult, for a hijacker to get into
the cockpit, the story quoted the pilots' official as saying, the FAA and the airlines could avoid situations in which violence toward the cockpit crew could lead to tragedy.

As Diane Kezerle read this 31-year-old news story she had stumbled upon, she said, she "was just heartbroken. All that time ago, the pilots knew this was necessary. If the terrorists on Sept. 11 had not been able to gain access to the cockpit, the pilots could have steered those planes away from the
buildings, and saved all those lives.

"I don't know why no one acted on these suggestions," Kezerle said. "Was it
a matter of economics? Was it a matter of airline safety going out of the news when something else came up? I don't know if anyone has the answers, but 31 years ago, the pilots were telling the government what needed to be done."

The pilots' proposal was quite detailed -- right down to the kind of equipment best for communicating with the passenger cabin from behind the locked cockpit door, and the type of hinge pins that should be used on the
door for safety reasons. In their letter to the FAA, the pilots said, "the materials required are currently available, lightweight and relatively inexpensive. The technology is available and extensive modification is not necessary."

Kezerle kept looking through the microfilms; she found another story published the same month -- Sept. 26, 1970 -- in which then-Secretary of Transportation John A. Volpe and then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
announced that hundreds of armed FBI and Treasury agents, along with FAA air marshals
and trained military personnel, would be riding on U.S. flights to make sure
passengers were safe. Volpe said that, in addition to the armed air marshals, "the most important single thing would be preventing a potential hijacker from ever getting on an airplane."

Thirty-one years ago, they apparently knew what was necessary. And yet, 31
Septembers later. . . .

The Airline Pilots Association, in its 1970 letter to the FAA, said that for the protection of passengers, crews and the American public, no halfway measures should be acceptable, and that the U.S. government must be "the international leader in security measures."

Otherwise, the pilots of 1970 said, hijackers could do something to the
cockpit crews that would "mean certain disaster for all aboard the airplane."


******

Yep.

[Toad]

Say, what are they making those doors out of, anyway?

 http://www.usatoday.com/hphoto.htm


"Stepped-up security siphons companies' cash

From $1.2 million for bulletproof cockpit doors at Alaska Airlines..."


Fleet Size

Alaska Airlines

Aircraft model/ No. of aircraft
B737-400 / 40
MD-80 140 / 32
B737-200C / 9
B737-700 / 16
B737-900 / 5

TOTAL 102


Horizon Airlines (subsidiary)

Aircraft model / No. of aircraft
Bombardier Dash 8 / 37
Fokker F-28 4000 / 19
BombardierQ400 / 8
Bombardier CRJ700 / 3
TOTAL 67

169 cockpit doors for 1.2 million dollars? $7000 a door? Oh, well... it's an AIRPLANE door.. that must be it.

[Ripsnort]

hmm, not sure Toad, I'm not in Manufacturing Engineering anymore, maybe I'll ask one of my customers next time they call in with a software problem.  Often we get sent models, and its very easy to tell what the aircraft part is, coming from that field.