Author Topic: Airline Pilots To Be Armed (Read 1206 times)

K98k · « **Reply #15 on:** November 25, 2002, 03:16:56 PM »

Quote

I would be worried about the "can have" policy changing to a "must have".

i look and see canada in your profile, what i can't believe is why anyone in the u.s. gives a rats arse why you're worried about u.s. air carriers and their pilots.

don't like it? take a hike.

Thrawn · « **Reply #16 on:** November 25, 2002, 03:35:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by K98k
i look and see canada in your profile, what i can't believe is why anyone in the u.s. gives a rats arse why you're worried about u.s. air carriers and their pilots.

don't like it? take a hike.

Is anyone making you read my post?

don't like it? take a hike.

K98k · « **Reply #17 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:15:17 PM »

well, i can read your posts and i can respond to your posts and in this instance my response remains the same which basically boils down to, you don't matter.

Thrawn · « **Reply #18 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:19:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by K98k
well, i can read your posts and i can respond to your posts and in this instance my response remains the same, you don't matter.

Well, I can post what I want as long as HTC doesn't tell me to stop and there's nothing you can do about it.

And if I don't matter why do you keep on responding to my posts? LOL!

Curval · « **Reply #19 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:28:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
my reaction at the time of the 9/11 murders was to state on this board that we needed to get the sky marshall program reinstituted and we needed to arm and train airline pilots and crew.

I believe this goes along with mr Lott's view that more guns equal less crime. We all seen what less guns equals... schoolyard slaughter.
lazs

Lazs...Creamo and his union are doing a fine job of putting the airlines into financial ruin...your sky marshall idea is one that can finnish the job. Do you have ANY idea of what it would cost to put these guys on every flight in and out of the US...not to mention the internal flights..which were the ones targeted on 9/11?

Pilots I agree with arming...crew..no frigging way. I've seen many of the "Aqua Velva" stewards and even I could kick their bellybutton and take their gun away.

Your last paragraph I simply won't reply to because I have spent enough time argueing that subject with you.

whgates3 · « **Reply #20 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:35:01 PM »

...still wont stop Al-Q from getting on the toronto to mexico city ride & slamming it into the sears tower...

Curval · « **Reply #21 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:40:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by K98k
you don't matter.

Hmm...I'm guessing you're 13 or 14 years old judging by your comments here.

lazs2 · « **Reply #22 on:** November 25, 2002, 04:46:57 PM »

ok curval... i'll bite... How much would it cost to increase sky marshalls. and allow pilots and select crew to take training courses at their own time and expense? Who in their right mind wants to fly now with all the delay for security and the hassle.... i can drive a 10 hour trip at least as fast and I can bring my nail clipper with me and... I won't get frisked and... I will have a comfortable seat with some friggin leg room not to mention save a few bucks.

We have a very large supply of trained firearms carrying people out there right now.. they can, are trusted to, carry firearms in most places except planes. I don't think a terrorist would get far if even a couple of people on board were armed. I don't think the attempts would be made at all if they thought there might be people on board who could defend themselves.
lazs

Curval · « **Reply #23 on:** November 25, 2002, 05:03:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
ok curval... i'll bite... How much would it cost to increase sky marshalls. and allow pilots and select crew to take training courses at their own time and expense?

We have a very large supply of trained firearms carrying people out there right now.. they can, are trusted to, carry firearms in most places except planes. I don't think a terrorist would get far if even a couple of people on board were armed. I don't think the attempts would be made at all if they thought there might be people on board who could defend themselves.
lazs

At their own time and expense lazs? Come on. That is NOT what you said above. Besides, you cannot give guns to people who have taken a course in firearms from a school chosen from a pack of matches..it would need to be controlled and supervised. Who's gonna pay for that?

How much would sky marshall's cost..actually I really don't know. But, lets look at some conservative figures. Lets take one route on one airline on one day. Say New York to Miami. American has three flights daily out of JFK...there and back. Let's assume you assign a Sky Marshall that stays on the flight from morning until evening...a 10 hour shift. How much will that cost the airline? If you had your way we would be looking at $15 an hour...and get someone who didn't know his job, but can shoot accurately and not shoot himself or anyone around him. Could this same person save the lives of everyone on board an aircraft by handling a hijacking situation involving hostages? I wouldn't trust you to do it...would you trust me? I would say the cost would be more like $50/hour for a properly trained and authorised person. Thats $500 per day, or $182,500 per year..flights on this route are 7 days a week, 365 days a year.

That is one flight out of one airport done. How many more can you come up with. We are talking billions to merely cover the internal flights in the US.

Kanth · « **Reply #24 on:** November 25, 2002, 05:30:38 PM »

$19-$22 dollars an hour; two part time shifts of 5 hours each to escape benefits and he misses sometimes but is generally accurate and reasonable with good judgement.

anyone have a pair of queens? lazs2?

lazs2 · « **Reply #25 on:** November 25, 2002, 05:36:03 PM »

so how much is that per flight? how much has the heightened security cost and what percentage of that is sky marshals.. ? I don't think you know anything about it. In any case... you wouldn't have em on every flight... terrorists would have to guess. I just wanted more of em. as for training... courses would have to be approved of course... that is not a problem in the states... we have lots of excellent firearms trainning facilities but... some specialized courses would be needed. In any case they probly would not cost the airlines any more than the sensitivity or sexual harrasment or managment or any of a myriad of courses they are mandating presently. I don't think the cost would be much.

maybe such actions will only stop 9 out of ten hijaking attempts... seems worthwhile to me if they stop 1 out of ten tho... especially if the one is the one I'm on.
lazs

Curval · « **Reply #26 on:** November 25, 2002, 06:16:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kanth
$19-$22 dollars an hour; two part time shifts of 5 hours each to escape benefits and he misses sometimes but is generally accurate and reasonable with good judgement.

anyone have a pair of queens? lazs2?

Good attempt at humour Kanth. Okay, lets use these numbers, and I'll even split the difference, let call it $20/hour.

How many air marshals do we need?

How many flights are we talking about?

I have no idea, and frankly I'm not going to spend the time trying to even hazard a guess. I think my point is still valid, and to make it effective it is going to cost billions annually to put trained guys on flights to stop the type of attack we saw on 9/11.

I say give the pilots guns and train them. Make them pass courses on hand to hand combat...whatever. I think that knowledge would prevent the murdering scumbags from trying the same style of attack.

The problem, of course is (as someone already pointed out): what do you do for non-domestic (note that I didn't use 'foreign')flights with non-regulated pilots in the cockpits?

My first thought after 9/11 was a gas that could be triggered by the pilot which would knock eveyone out in the cabin. Recent events made me revise that line of thought, particularly when children are going to be subjected to possible death by gassing.

I do think that we should start to think about other possible terrorist threats and not concentrate on airlines alone. I don't believe that they will try the same thing again, but as I could be wrong I advocate the issuance of guns to pilots. What about biological attacks against the US water supply, attacks on nuclear facilities, nuclear waste depots, nuclear power plants, non-nuclear power plants, damns, food supplies etc etc? We have to think about everything because you can bet THEY are.

Toad · « **Reply #27 on:** November 25, 2002, 06:46:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
I have a few questions that I hope you can answer.

Where is all the money from the security surcharges on airplane tickets going?

Is there any standardization on the firearms training?

Can the PIC tell the FO to leave the firearm off the plane?

I would be worried about the "can have" policy changing to a "must have".

Nope, can't answer them with 100% certainty. Some I don't know, some haven't been decided as yet.

Where's the money go? Well, the Federal Aviation Trust Fund was supposed to be available to improve facilities with things like VASI lights and full ILS approaches (instead of Localizers). Thing is, it quickly became so much money that they just banked it instead to show as an asset to offset the annual deficits. Rarely, if ever, did they actually spend much of it. Results were that you'd fly into a major airport like ATL and all the runways didn't even have VASI lights.

Firearms training protocols haven't been determined as yet but it is my understanding that it will be a standardized program and you will have to pass, just like a checkride.

The Captain will decide the firearms policy for the cockpit. One of the last bastions of absolute authority (when airborne) is the left seat of an airliner.

Can have will never be must have. Both the Feds and the Union agree on that.

That's the way I see it supported by what I've been reading. Nothing really set in stone yet though.

Thrawn · « **Reply #28 on:** November 25, 2002, 07:17:43 PM »

Thanks.

It will be interesting to see what the fallout will be if and when something goes wrong with a firearm in the cockpit of an airliner.

I just had a thought, is the FAA going to be the organisation that writes up the protocols on firearm use in a cockpit?

aac · « **Reply #29 on:** November 26, 2002, 12:30:48 AM »

Peace Officers in the state of Texas already are taking a specific course "Armed Officers in flight". One of the things wrong with it is they do not stress enough (in my opinion) the need to load your weapon with only shot shells. If the high jacking happens at altitude explosive decompression will take place when a .357 or other high speed bullet exits the plane tearing a rather large hole has it takes spars, etc. with it.

Now if every armed person wheither it be Sky Marshall, regular peace officer, or the pilot is required to only use shot shells the chance of this will be lessened by a factor of 200. The next question you will have I know is "Well if it wont damage the plane as much just how effective could it be on a human?" The answer is they are extreamly effective at close range. 7-15 yards

So what is the average distance in a gun fight. 3-12 yards in police work is the average with most of them being at 10-15 feet. Now given the short distance the chance of you missing a full size human are very small and the shot shell does so much damage inside the human torso the terrorist will never live to see a doctor unless there is one on the plane, and even if there is a doctor cant sew up all the vessels, organs, and tissue that a shot shell tears up before the terrorist bleeds to death.

You can get shot shells in 38 caliber in 00 buck shot all the ray down to #9 shot. My preference after doing extensive testing is the number 4 shot. 117 pellets moving at 850 fps the wound cavity is about 5" from 20 feet away with 7" of penetration. So given that the average human is about 9" thick front to back the shot will never exit but will feel the full effect of the shock to his system. The 00 buck only has three pellets and when loaded to 850 fps it will exit the human body and still have enough energy to penetrate the skin of a second person. Only takes 65lbs per square inch.

Just my opinion for what's worth, LOL which is probably nothing.