Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: 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.
-
i think lazs hit it directly on the damn head earlier today.
-
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
-
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!"
(http://www.siteviper.com/54sq/imgs/flag.usa.gif)
-
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
-
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 )
-
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 ]
-
Hi All,
The Balistic Bulkhead would probably work, the other option as well (As long as it didn't run under Windows) :eek: 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
-
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
-
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 !
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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.
-
I am a strong believer in the right to keep and bear arms, but not on an airplane. Baine hit the nail on the head. How do security personel tell who is the good guy and who is the bad guy? No access to the cockpit, and Sky Marshalls do make sense.
-
Devils advocate,...sky marhsals make some sense, but only if we assume all the would-be hijackers get up at one time and reveal themselves.
What happens when all but one or two of the hijackers gets up, so they can see who the sky marhsal is. All that one or two have to do is wait for the marshal to turn his back and boom.
Ok,..the hijackers now have the passenger cabin undr control. Now to the pilots unbreachable door.
They tell the pilot to open the door or they will start executing all members in the passenger cabin.
So the pilot maydays the situation in and lands. Probably a best case scenario, but by that time most of the passengers will have been executed.
The plane is safe, the pilots and engineers are safe, and if the intention of the terrorists were to run into a building, that event has been stopped.
Sigh,..either way all the passengers and most of the flight crew are dead.
Deterrents are meant to keep sane people from trying something stupid. The insane terrorist is not going to be hampered by what we are suggesting.
The public outcry from all or most of the passengers being murdered because the pilot did not open the door would be very high. We would all specualte what the intention of the terrorist(s) were, and possibly lambast the pilots for not allowing the plane to be taken to save the lives of the ones murdered.
I have said it before and I will say it again. You cannot stop terrorism at the gate, it has to be stopped long before then.
Better security measures at airports is a good start. D/FW airport has enough security wholes to drive a truck of dynamite through.
The exits to the baggage area can easliy allow entry from the baggage area. There is no security at the those revolving doors.
At the entrance to the terminals, where you are supposed to be scanned, there are walkaround paths, intended for exits, but again, all you have to do is have one person distract the scan folks at the belts and anyone can walk right on through.
The items it takes to make a small, crude bomb can be carried onboard, without any trouble whatsoever.
You don't stop a child from being harmed on a defective playground toy by putting a band-aid on the wound each time he gets hurt. You remove or repair the toy that is causing the injury.
I am not stating we should not do what has been suggested. I think it is a start. But for any security measure to be effective, the whole path a passenger takes to get to the plane needs to be reviewed and look for ways to improve security.
Some added suggestions:
1) Immediately stop allowing carryons, except those required for medical purposes.
2) Secure entrance and exits in the airports better. This requires a wide range of ways and personnel to be looked into.
3) Cameras in the passenger cabin to allow the pilots to see what is going on.
4) Chemical scanners at the airport entrance. Metal detectors cannot detect plastic explosive.
5) Credential security for airline employees need to be completely rethought.
6) Collision detection could be implemented to have a plane circumvent the pilot to avoid collisions.
I am sure there are more. It is all about money. How much will it cost? How much more would you spend on an airline ticket? How long will it take to implement? How much to support it?
Anyway,..just some thoughts.
-
Now if HTC could create a game "Stop the Terrorists", we could play that until we have solved all the negative issues, then hand over the program to the U.S. Gov't.
Personally, I don't think money has an issue anymore when it comes to stopping commercial airliner's from being hijacked. The ballistic wall would be part of the package. We don't make flak jackets from silk! I would like to see three Sky Marshalls(ex Navy Seals-gives em something to do besides becoming an instuctor) on every flight, assisting us on/off the airliner, the day of the flight attendant person is over. I don't think the pilots would mind either. Cost is not an issue, not anymore. Times have changed. I will pay the price.
Let the Air Marshalls sit in a high jump seat with a Mini-Mac MG where he can see all the pretty faces. And I can get my own bottle of water and bag of food before I board the airliner. Forget the hot towel. I will treat myself and my wife to a great meal when we land, and are out of the red zone and secure. Now, can you spell revenge.....B 5 2
Thorns
-
Ok, "Aircraft Tech" is a far shorter word than "Aircraft Modifications Technician" which is my full job title on my uniform badge. Thats why I used that in the title....too long of a word in a limited title space.
I work on Learjets, Cessna Citation jets, Gulfsteam IIIs and IVs, BAe Hawker jets, and Israeli Astras.
As for the comment that bulkheads are expensive, I never said they would be free. But to claim that they would be useless or too expensive is ludicrious. I've taken apart and reassembled many aircraft interiors. It wouldn't be that big of a deal, at least for me. It's not like I am even claiming you need to do a full wall, just the door.
As for somebody saying that any pilot would turn over the plane to the terrorist has not been watching the news lately. Do you honestly beleave the pilots and passengers of any hijacking after what happened Tuesday will cooperate with somebody who wants to fly the plane themselves? Just look at what happened in Pennsylvania. The passengers ignored their personal safety and tried to subdue the terrorists.
It has already happened. It used to be OK to cooperate with terrorists, listen to their demands and let them have their way, but not any more.
Airliners need to be alot more safe.
-
I think all the savings the airlines made due to seemingly slack or non-existant security just went out the window multiplied by lots. Don't you think?
-
skuzzy... the air marshalls would be trained. they would not get themselves in that situation except in extreme cases, still way better than what we have now plus.... Just as when they were used a lot... the thing would never come up..... Most terrorists would simply right off taking over a plane as being a bad risk. Also... with an air marshall on board it would galvinize the other passengers... we have PROOF of how brave ordinary citezens can be when they know they are doing the right thing and.. seeing air marshalls fight with terrorists... Passengers would not have much of a decision to make so far as who needed help and who needed stopped. How do the terrorists know that there isn't two sky marshalls on board even if they manage to somehow overcome the first armed and highly trained one? Naaa... we just won't see any skyjacking attempts for so long that we will get complacent and dump or nutt the new sky marshall program..... history will repeat..... or not.
As for the doors being breached... NOTHING would allow the crew to open the doors. Anything that is happening out there would continue to happen and worse if the doors are opened.... The saftey and possible deaths of thousands of people would be on the line... they crew would have no legal or moral right to open those doors. I would suggest that they not look.
lazs
-
Here is an idea I got from another friend online.
A "Hihack" button protected by a glass shield in the cockpit. You know, the "break glass to sound alarm" type thing.
Once that is hit, the controls are LOCKED OUT COMPLETELY AND IRREVOKEABLY, and the plane locks onto the nearest large airport (using GPS if it's over the ocean and can't detect beacons) and lands itself. The airports are alterted by the 0777 (Hijack transponder code right?) that is automatically sent by the system.
If it's accidentally set off, well, damn, a 4 or 5 hour delay. Once it's installed AND PUBLICISED the terrorists know that there is nothing that can be done to stop it. It's going to an airport (not of their choice) and it's going to land. Then they have to deal with whoever is the authority at that airport.
Ouch out
-
lazs1,..I was just playing devils advocate on this issue. Many good ideas are being bounced around. I just wanted to give it a more thorough going over.
I still say the best way to stop it is way before it gets to the plane.
I am not saying we do not need sky marshals. I just think we should pay more attention to what is going on before the plane is loaded with passengers.
There a lot of areas that need improvement, and some would cause zero delay in the flight process, but could help quite a bit.
-
i don know why you guys are all worrying about hijackingins in america now. it'll never happen again as long as we are alive. before tuesday i would have sat in my seat, strayed quiet and hoped i made it home in 1 piece. now, i wager myselfand every other american is gonna bum rush those motherdiddlyers before they can get to the cockpit. they better bring enough bullets to kill everyone on the plane if htey wanna pull another stunt like this one, and that manny bullets are gonna make big holes which will rapidly get larger.
-
I dont think our current technology permits the landing of large airliners on runways automatically via computer pilots.
Could be wrong thou, secret tech?
-
They can land automatically already Zygote. Remote? I dont thing so.
From takeoff to pavement, yes, all computers.
-
skuzzy let's get this straight.... There is no security measure that will keep a bad guy from coming on board with a weapon. harsher and harsher security measures just erode our freedom and are eye candy... We do a pretty good job of keeping guns and bombs out... That's the best that can be done.
Plastic (balistic nylon and kevlar) "bowie knife", 6" blade will drive through a 3/4" sheet of plywood without breaking $19.95 in most outdoors catalouges.... How the hell you gonna keep me from bringing one on board in my boot? Meanwhile you have made people miss connections.... be all but strip searched.... have no carry on and park a mile away from the terminal and haven't done dick for security once the wheels leave the ground.
Worse... what if I were to grab a stewerdess and snap her neck.... let her drop and grab another and threaten to snap her neck if anyone interfered while I kicked in the pilot door? You gonna make everyone come on board in chains?
sure... make sure there are no bombs or bad guys with fireams.... if guns frieghten you or you honestly feel that they might end up in the bad guys hands... Use that clumsy ring thingie that allows only the ring wearer to fire the gun.
It's mot about you anymore.... It's about me on the ground that your flying bomb might hit.
lazs
-
what do I like about sky marshalls and security "terrorist resistant" cockpit doors? They don't affect my freedom or intrude on my life. and would be highly effective.
What do I hate about all the othe ideas??? they are highly intrusive, subject to massive abuse and totally inefective.
lazs
-
Creamo,
You sound like an Airbus mechanic, land automatically, well define WHEN they can do it. Calm day, no crosswind, the airport is so equipped, no worries, lets see em implement it when there is a 45 kt. cross wind and wind shear. This automation bull toejam, is exactly that, roadkill. The damn thing of it is this:
Until we beef up security on the ground, fire these worthless security agencys like Argenbright, and use the National Guard as security until a suitable alternative is found. The problem will still exist. You keep the wackos without their weapons, remove the possibility of their being a bomb and threats become meaningless.
I don't know about the rest of ya'll but we have serious problems, and they require more thought than this ridiculous emergency auto-land button talk.
-
"B-757/767 aircraft must be operated in compliance with Certificate Limitations of the applicable FAA Approved Flight Manual section and the Minimum Equipment List contained in the Aircraft Restrictions Manual."
LIMITATIONS
AUTOFLIGHT
Autoland Maximum Winds
Headwind 25 Knots
Crosswind 25 Knots
Tailwind 10 Knots
Note: Do not autoland when A/C when ground speed exceeds 165 knots [Toad: Basically, this would be in a very high gross weight situation.]
TAKOFF AND LANDING
On takeoff, do not engage autopilot (CMD or CWS) below 1,000 feet AGL. Do NOT use CWS for landing.
*********
CMD is Command. The Autopilot will follow Flight Management System (computer programed by pilot) commands or commands manually input via the Autopilot control panel. CWS is Control Wheel Steering. The pilot moves the yoke and rudders and the autopilot will maintain the attitude the pilot puts it in. IE: Raise the nose to 10 degrees nose up and let go of the yoke and the A/P will hold 10 degrees nose up.]
There are no commercial aircraft that I am aware of that allow Autopilot takeoff. Every aircraft that I have ever flown has a minimum altitude for autopilot engagement, usually fairly close to 1000' AGL.
As a sidenote, 757/767 aircraft can be manually flow under the following limitations:
TAKEOFF AND LANDING
Crosswind 29 Knots
Tailwind 10 Knots
There is no Headwind limitation when flown manually.
-
Geez lazs1, I had to reread my post and could not find anything you purport me as saying.
All I made was a list of suggestions, none of which put passengers in chains, or would remove marshalls and none of which would impede the passenger loading of airplanes.
But if it takes slowing the process down to keep a plane from being used as a weapon, then I am for it.
I beleive a better job can be done in the airport, with regards to security, than was/is being done today. And none of it would impede the passenger or the loading process.
If I am wrong, the feel free to quote my post and tell me. I welcome rational discussions of how to improve the safety of all people in the air and on the ground.
-
Hey LtHans, where do you work out of? I too am a mechanic on Lear 35A's, GII's and GIV's...That hellhole in the 35A is a squeak ain't it? What about them 24mos Gulfstream inspections like under the tail compartment inspections and remove the gamma tubes etc, etc. Yuch....Oh well, I'd rather work on the Gulfsteam IV then a Sabreliner or a HS125...or a Falconjet.
I work for a management/charter company in upstate NY.
As for security measures, I would personally take a good look at Israel's Airline and notice that they haven't had one instance of hijacking ever. They use air marshalls, tight check in security and armed guards in the airports with automatic weapons. So far I've seen police with automatic weapons in the airports. Check in and security is still a joke at most airports. Ramp access is far to easy. You can even buy ramp passes I've heard at certain airports! You have to go through shady characters to get one but you can still get one.