Author Topic: Since we're aviation, and I am an aircraft tech, things realistically to be done... (Read 1081 times)

LtHans · « **on:** September 13, 2001, 01:03:00 AM »

I work on buisness jets, and they're fairly sophisticated aircraft with all the latest gear.

There are some things that can be done to make airliners and jets safer.

1. A ballistic bulkhead behind the cockpit and a security door for the cockpit. Nobody gets in or out, along with a law preventing any passengers from visiting the cockpit.

2. Changes to the flight managment gear that include an option for people on the ground to upload a flight plan to the plane's autopilot to send it somewhere, as well as the abillity to lock out the pilot's control. We have the technology to fully automate flights, including takeoff and langing.

Option 1 can easily be done and wouldn't cost too much to do. Hell, large metro taxi drivers use this sort of thing to prevent muggings, why not airliners?

Option 2 is very expensive, and not all together safe either. It can malfunction more than it works, and could be used AGAINST the airliner to make it crash.

I think the bulkhead idea is a good one.

Hans.

moose · « **Reply #1 on:** September 13, 2001, 01:37:00 AM »

i think lazs hit it directly on the damn head earlier today.

Duckwing6 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 13, 2001, 06:03:00 AM »

eeeekkkk you think that modifying the original cockpit bulkheads plus certification etc et c etc of thousands of airliners is gona be easy ???

having the door locked and no folks getting into the cockpit is a good idea tho .. guess the jumpseat times are over

DW6
-> Engineer Lauda Air

Sky Viper · « **Reply #3 on:** September 13, 2001, 08:22:00 AM »

Easy or not, I agree that the cockpits should be hard secured.
Computer take over systems that can control the plane from the ground would be out of the question! They may cause more harm than good.

I think the ultimate security would/should be within each of us.
As the evidence comes to the surface, it looks as though one of the attacks was thwarted by the willing minds and fearless hearts of passangers on board one of the hi-jacked aircraft.

We must be ready to prevent events such as this from EVER happening again.
Even with the coming changes in security, we can not rely on FAA and Airport Security alone. We must protect ourselves and our fellow citizens.

Tom Herriman
AKA SkViper
"Sept. 11, 2001...a booster shot in the arm of Patriotism!"

lazs1 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 13, 2001, 08:43:00 AM »

No "system" will protect you. If the terrorist mean to merely crash the plane then they will destroy the controls.

A bulkhead is a great idea. It will give the sky marshall more of the most valuable comodity... time. I also have no problem with one or more of the sealed in flight crew being armed.
lazs

john9001 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 13, 2001, 12:08:00 PM »

i have a conceled weapons permit and i (maybe not you )would feel better if i could take my gun on the plane with me, and don't bring up shooting holes in planes, for the sky marshels program a frangable bullet was developed, it kills people but not planes (also good for home defense, won't go through a wall, save your neighbor )

lazs1 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 13, 2001, 02:23:00 PM »

I have no problem knowing that anyone with a concealed carry permit or any off duty law enforcement personel may be carrying a gun anywhere I may be including aircraft. I would ask that you use the proper ammo on aircraft tho.

Oh.... yes I would not only not mind but i would indeed feel better knowing there may be armed citizens on the plane with me. Conversly.... crazies and terrorists would undoubtably feel worse. Can you imagine the courage it took for those people on the penn flight to attack terrorists with their bare hands??? I am ashamed that they were forced to do it.
lazs

[ 09-13-2001: Message edited by: lazs1 ]

snafu · « **Reply #7 on:** September 13, 2001, 03:03:00 PM »

Hi All,
The Balistic Bulkhead would probably work, the other option as well (As long as it didn't run under Windows)

I've heard many suggestions in the various programs analysing this catastrophe. One which I thought merited investigation was a seperate (Filtered)?? air supply for the cockpit and fill the rest of the plane with something to knock the terrorist's, passengers etc out. With the bulkhead this would give the pilots the time & ability to render the hostile party unconcious (sp)? This also has the advantage of not harming anyone and gives the authorities the ability to "Rip there Head off & toejam down the hole" when they come around.

TTFN
snafu

whels · « **Reply #8 on:** September 13, 2001, 03:35:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by LtHans:
I work on buisness jets, and they're fairly sophisticated aircraft with all the latest gear.

There are some things that can be done to make airliners and jets safer.

1. A ballistic bulkhead behind the cockpit and a security door for the cockpit. Nobody gets in or out, along with a law preventing any passengers from visiting the cockpit.

2. Changes to the flight managment gear that include an option for people on the ground to upload a flight plan to the plane's autopilot to send it somewhere, as well as the abillity to lock out the pilot's control. We have the technology to fully automate flights, including takeoff and langing.

Option 1 can easily be done and wouldn't cost too much to do. Hell, large metro taxi drivers use this sort of thing to prevent muggings, why not airliners?

Option 2 is very expensive, and not all together safe either. It can malfunction more than it works, and could be used AGAINST the airliner to make it crash.

I think the bulkhead idea is a good one.

Hans.

YEp, secure steel door, that once plane leaves the gate cant and/or wont be opened
for anything that goes on in passenger cabin.
if anything happens there, then the pilot
should land at nearest airport.

whels

Duckwing6 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 14, 2001, 02:39:00 AM »

Oh my .. i can't think of anything scaryer than ANYONE with a gun permit (concealed or not doesn't mater to me) carying a gun on an airplane...

Doesn't it occure to you guys that HAVING allready makes you a danger ? some problems here, a loss in the stock exchange there and BAWOOMMM some goes balistic on a transcontinental flight. It has happened many times before that someone ran amok with a perfrctly legal gun !

lazs1 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 14, 2001, 08:32:00 AM »

duck... we have hundreds of thousands of people in this country that have concealed carry permits. Can you name one incident where such a person went crazy and shot anyone needlessly?

quite the opposite is true. many concealed carry permit holders have shown restraint that caused them to take beatings that allmost killed em before ending the attack.

The real qustion is... do I feel more safe with a concealed carry fellow citezen onboard or do I feel safer if his gun is surrendered at the gate and the only possible guy on the plane that is armed is the bad guy?
lazs

Bodhi · « **Reply #11 on:** September 14, 2001, 09:00:00 AM »

Hey Lt. Hans,

As a long time Aircraft Mechanic (why try to disguise it with fancy names, aircraft tech???), I want to comment on your two ideas. A ballistic door that is locked at all times. Basic precept is a good idea. Cheap it will definitely not be. All the rules a nd regs that are going to have to be aligned will assure you of that. Also, what is going to happen when one of the flight deck crew has to take a toejam? Gonna install a bathroom up there too? So maybe two sets of doors, just in case they need to come out, they are still secure. Lastly on this part, you had better include millions of dollars for training these guys are gonna need to not open the door when they here some coward gutting a flight attendant with a knife to get them too do just that.

As for an uploadable flight plan? What are you going to do when some yahoo terrorist figures out to upload one from the ground. Bad idea in my view, just gonna add to the airbus syndrome.

Hey Duckwing,

You have got to be a young engineer if ya do not remember air marshalls running around on all our flights. Cripes, I always squeaked as to why they stopped! Too expensive, the risks are not that high. Well... guess what, countless thousands are dead, and the WTC complex is destroyed. Bet ya the costs would have been less had the air marshalls stayed on flights all these years. As for someone "losing it", I guess you better do up one hell of a psych profile when you hire them.

In my opinion, the next best thing to do to help security surrounding airlines, is to fire all these retarded, "I don't wanna be here!", $5.00 an hour, non-English speaking, rent a cops at the damn security checkpoints. Until you replace them with well paid, intelligent, hard working personnel, security is gonna be a joke. Another thing to do, that not everyone realises, when is the last time you have seen some airline employees go through security check points
yet still have access to the ramp?? Happens all the time, and it needs to stop.

We have a serious problem, that needs to be addressed IMMEDIATELY. Until it is, everyone that flies, is at risk.

Lephturn · « **Reply #12 on:** September 14, 2001, 11:51:00 AM »

As we have seen demonstrated, unfortunately it is a lot more than just the people flying that are at risk.

I think the combination of air marshals and good bulkhead doors are a good solution.

As for the pilot/crew needing to take a dump, tough noogies. There are no bathrooms in fighter planes, yet they still ferry those across the globe. It can be done.

Lephturn

Baine · « **Reply #13 on:** September 14, 2001, 12:37:00 PM »

Quote

The real qustion is... do I feel more safe with a concealed carry fellow citezen onboard or do I feel safer if his gun is surrendered at the gate and the only possible guy on the plane that is armed is the bad guy?
lazs

How do the people at check-in tell the good guy with a gun from the bad guy with a gun? And what happens if, like Tuesday, five or six badguys with guns all get on one flight?
I think the whole idea of anybody with a gun on a plane is a scary thing.
The reason Tuesday's attacks succeeded is because nobody thought the people who took over the planes were aiming to crash them. It wasn't because the passengers weren't able to defend themselves. When people on the last fight realized what the hijackers intended. They fought back

Duckwing6 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 14, 2001, 02:09:00 PM »

Bodhi true i'm not a very old engineer (5 years Lauda Air Engineering, Powerplan APUs 737)

i'm from Austria, we have a program like your Air Marshalls, here it's called "Tigers" Programm, but a fact is that there's only so many tigers and there's FAR more flights than you could ever put them on.

My comments regarding weapons on A/C:
I thought that Lasz1 did suggest that ANYONE with a concealed gun permit can carry ony on an A/C .. now that's a sick idea.

other than that i can only concur that ballistic bulkheads and sealed cockpits are not gonna happen ...

The only way to fight highjaking is to stop them on the ground before they even get on the A/C IMO.