Another American Airlines Incident

[TurboS7]

For the last month I show up at security in uniform take my jacket
shoes and belt and all my hardware, and shoes, and send it through the X-ray, no beeps and works perfect. Cheers.

 

[ifly4food]

Well, KiloMoke, I'll bite at the risk of making another childish statement. I didn't have time to reply to Avbug's rant, and didn't really care to. As for your chiding, how often do you pass through security (post 9-11) when you report to work to fly your Citation? You haven't got the first or even second clue if what's going on out there. I love the "anybody can get a uniform and badge" argument that touse outside the industry come up with. You show me some proof of that... you can't even buy pilot shoes now without getting the third degree.

As for your other argument, I think we should ban all corporate aviation... some CE-900 pilot who didn't pass through security might carry out a terrorist attack. I think I'll write my Senator now.
Better safe than sorry, right?

 

[Pilotadjuster]

c4 and x-rays

A couple of points; plastic explosives (C4 or other types) are very stable and need a rather high source of heat to ignite. I had thought a blasting cap was necessary to produce the heat to ignite C4 (only did it once myself and thats how they had us wire the charge).

Also--c4 does not show up on x-ray scanners or with wand scanners. I have seen numerous television reports with people putting their shoes through the x-ray machine. A close inspection by security personnel would be far more effective (unless they are looking for shoe phones....).

PA

 

[RJPilot]

First, I would like to say avbugs makes some good points. Second, for those people who think c4 won't explode with out a blasting cap your wrong. Crude examples of c4 can be found in fireworks. Second, crude c4 can also be made in a persons house with some basic knowledge of chemistry. Granted it may not hold the punch as a military grade c4 but non the less this type of c4 can be easily set off by an accelerater (not blasting cap) and take the largest of planes down. Third, if the plane went down over the ocean do you think they would have ever recovered the parts or black box to know what really happened? How long do think this recovery could take?
Again, avbug makes some great points while iflyforfood is well... somewhat moronic. I love to take him into the lab and show him the truth about many things he is so ignorant about. By the time I am done with him he would be so paranoid he would be checking passengers and other pilot's under arm deodrant and nail polish.
Good Luck Bro-You need it.

 

[ifly4food]

iflyforfood is well... somewhat moronic. I love to take him into the lab and show him the truth about many things he is so ignorant about. By the time I am done with him he would be so paranoid he would be checking passengers and other pilot's under arm deodrant and nail polish.
Good Luck Bro-You need it.

1.) I never called you or anyone else a moron nor ignorant. Your personal attack was not necessary.

2) You may be right. However, I refuse to give in to this parenoid hysteria that is invading our society. To do so fufills the terrorist objective. If you want to do so, then that's your perogative.

I strongly suggest you refrain from personal attacks if you wish to continue to debate here.
See you on the line.

 

[AWACoff]

Actually, if a plane explodes, there is residue left on the debris. Once the wreckage is recovered (from the ocean, land, etc.), they can do chemical analysis on it. TWA 800 had this exact situation you are mentioning, RJPilot. It would be fairly easy to determine that a crash was caused by a bomb. My question is....can "bomb" sniffing dogs (the ones that sniff for chemicals, etc.) smell plastic explosives like C4, Semtex...? I know they can detect dynamite.
See Yoooooooo!

 

[1900laker]

In regards to the debate over personal "RIGHTS",


One poster asked for someone to name another job where you have to forfit some of your rights to be employed there.

Thats easy and it won't take me 3 pages.

The United States Armed Services. Each military member upon entering service becomes subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which in many cases is far more restrictive than your normal rights as a citizen. The entire military is now made up of volunteers (no draft has been used since the early 70's). So there you have your example. I suspect that other members of governement service have similar instances where they forfeit some of their rights for their job.

No one forced them into those jobs, they volunteered. You have the right not to work for the airline.

I am not one for doing away with rights by any means, but lets not get ridiculous. Lets have a better system of screening that is appropriate for uniformed airline employees, where you are not being paraded in front of the public just simply to make them "feel" more safe. It can be done.


and AWACoff, I know the inside joke as well.

See Yoooooooooooo!

 

[ifly4food]

1900Laker,
While I agree that the military sector is closely screened, your argument is not valid. They aren't civillians.
I am a civillian. I didn't volunteer. I don't have to salute anyone nor take orders from airport soldiers. Military personnel do... they don't have the "rights" the rest of us do (while on duty). They gave this up when they signed on.
You are comparing apples vs. oranges.

As for your second statement, I agree. There is no need to parade us in this needless public spectacle. They still don't realize I have a crash ax and control wheel in my reach?!?

AWACoff, what was the "inside" joke?

 

[1900laker]

Alright you want a better example,

A city municipal worker says while on duty to a crowd of people that the mayor is an idiot. He exercises his first amendment right, and is immediately fired. Does he have a lawsuit?

How about a former government contractor that held a Top Secret clearance. He leaves his job, but decides to write a spy game type novel using info that he was privy to while holding his clearance. He should have submitted any literature with a theme as such for review by the appropriate agency before publication. But lets say he doesn't. He is excersing what he thinks is his 1st ammendment rights, but would undoubtedly go to prison if he divulged classified information.

There are examples all over the place of people who sacrifice some of their rights inherently in order to have the privelege of working some where.

If you were joe-blow citizen walking down the street, and were suddenly forced to go through a metal detector, wanded, patted down, and your belongings searched, I think you would have a valid point about your rights being violated.

Anytime you do anything that is considered a privelege in our society, you are now subject to new regulations which are often more restrictive than your rights as a citizen.

Let's use a common sense approach to all this, and stop with the extremism. If you wanna be an airline pilot, you are gonna have to put up with some crapola. It just needs to be reasonable crapola which our current security measures seem to be exceeding. A good cleansing of the FAA higher ups, and a replacement with some that would look at things objectively would probably fix 99% of what we see wrong out there today.
Separate access for crewmembers to secure areas than the general public would be a first step. Dual ID verification using retina/voice/thumb print/ or facial recog (these systems are all available today and are showing great promise and feasability) combined with an airlock type access (where only one person can go through at a time) would be a second step. Those two things would eliminate the need for personnel to screen employees going to work. If Flight crews are ever armed, there will have to be a system such as this in place, since there is no way we could go through the normal security checkpoints armed (what's the point).

The inside joke was someone we used to have at one of our bases while both working for Great Lakes. The guy would try to be nice to all the crews over our ops frequency. We would always say something like "later" or "C-ya" but in his foreign accent he would always reply in this pronunciation: "SEE UUUUUUUUUUUUUU", and it always made us kinda chuckle. Right Lakers?

 

[ifly4food]

Alright you want a better example,

A city municipal worker says while on duty to a crowd of people that the mayor is an idiot. He exercises his first amendment right, and is immediately fired. Does he have a lawsuit?

I think any employee who publicly degrades his boss while on duty would be fired. What's the relevance here?

How about a former government contractor that held a Top Secret clearance. He leaves his job, but decides to write a spy game type novel using info that he was privy to while holding his clearance. He should have submitted any literature with a theme as such for review by the appropriate agency before publication. But lets say he doesn't. He is excersing what he thinks is his 1st ammendment rights, but would undoubtedly go to prison if he divulged classified information.

If he divulged classified info, yes he broke the law. Again, apples vs. oranges... how does this apply to our situation?

There are examples all over the place of people who sacrifice some of their rights inherently in order to have the privelege of working some where.

If you were joe-blow citizen walking down the street, and were suddenly forced to go through a metal detector, wanded, patted down, and your belongings searched, I think you would have a valid point about your rights being violated.

I see no difference between Joe Blow on the street and Joe Blow at the airport. What would you say if the government did do random searches and pat downs with uniformed soldiers on the streets in the name of safety. After all, suicide bombers in Israel blow themselves up in public regularly. Would you favor that? Where does it end? See what I'm getting at here?

Anytime you do anything that is considered a privelege in our society, you are now subject to new regulations which are often more restrictive than your rights as a citizen.

I'm sad to hear going to work or travelling is now a privellege.

Let's use a common sense approach to all this, and stop with the extremism. If you wanna be an airline pilot, you are gonna have to put up with some crapola. It just needs to be reasonable crapola which our current security measures seem to be exceeding. A good cleansing of the FAA higher ups, and a replacement with some that would look at things objectively would probably fix 99% of what we see wrong out there today.
Separate access for crewmembers to secure areas than the general public would be a first step. Dual ID verification using retina/voice/thumb print/ or facial recog (these systems are all available today and are showing great promise and feasability) combined with an airlock type access (where only one person can go through at a time) would be a second step. Those two things would eliminate the need for personnel to screen employees going to work. If Flight crews are ever armed, there will have to be a system such as this in place, since there is no way we could go through the normal security checkpoints armed (what's the point).

I agree 100% This is what I've been saying all along. I think we really agree more than we disagree here.

The inside joke was someone we used to have at one of our bases while both working for Great Lakes. The guy would try to be nice to all the crews over our ops frequency. We would always say something like "later" or "C-ya" but in his foreign accent he would always reply in this pronunciation: "SEE UUUUUUUUUUUUUU", and it always made us kinda chuckle. Right Lakers?

Yes, good old Juanito in ORD ops. I am an ex-Laker.

See Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!

 

[1900laker]

I think you are right,

We probably agree on more than we disagree on.

We can parse it to death. I was just trying to say that some people believe freedom means the right to do anything without anyone restricting them in any way.


__________________________________________________

I see no difference between Joe Blow on the street and Joe Blow at the airport. What would you say if the government did do random searches and pat downs with uniformed soldiers on the streets in the name of safety. After all, suicide bombers in Israel blow themselves up in public regularly. Would you favor that? Where does it end? See what I'm getting at here?
___________________________________________________



I am certainly not in favor of that. But I see a difference. People pay to get on an airplane and be safe. They expect the airline, the airport, and the government to share in the role of protecting them. Anytime you expect the government to intervene, you are automatically going to sacrifice some of your freedom in exchange for some other benefit (safety in this case). Thats all.


___________________________________________________
After all, suicide bombers in Israel blow themselves up in public regularly. Would you favor that? Where does it end? See what I'm getting at here?
__________________________________________________


To help combat stuff like this, I personally would like to see a lot more concealed carry by citizens in our society. Wouldn't stop a bomber, but may discourage or prevent other crime from occuring. Afterall, we have already said that the government can not be all places, all the time, always there to be the first to act to protect us. I am strongly in favor of flight crews being armed as a last line of defense, behind a strong cockpit door, at least 2 air marshalls on board, cabin crew members armed with non-lethal weapons/stunguns, better educated/qualified security screeners.

Anyways thanks for the engaging discussion. Also thanks for reminding me of exactly where I heard Juanito. I was TDY to the east side for a couple of months as a new Captain (nothing like Ottumwa in the dead of winter), but primarily was based out of DEN. Take care

 

[AWACoff]

This was one of my favorites.....
Juanito: Tanx for your times and see yoooo!
Me: Hey Juanito, one more thing...
Juanito: yes sir?
Me: Seeeeeeee YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
PS. Sorry 'bout the off topic post but you just had to be there!

 

[Sandy]

?????I strongly suggest you refrain from personal attacks if you wish to continue to debate here.
See you on the line.????


Huh??? Ifly..??? Weren't you defending the constitution a few posts ago???? Didn't want to be searched for 'no reason'???? Now you are threatening freedom of speech??? What gives dear?

 

[ifly4food]

?????I strongly suggest you refrain from personal attacks if you wish to continue to debate here.
See you on the line.????


Huh??? Ifly..??? Weren't you defending the constitution a few posts ago???? Didn't want to be searched for 'no reason'???? Now you are threatening freedom of speech??? What gives dear?

Yes, I defend the Constitution... including the right to free speech. In light of this, I encourage you to exercize your right to free speech and open your own web site. There, you can make all the personal attacks you want.
As for this web site, it is privately owned. The owner has asked me and others to keep it clean and run the way he would like it to be. Therefore, there will be healthy, heated debate, but no personal attacks or flamebait. This is the webmaster's freedom of speech... it's his house. You can abide by his house rules, or you can go elsewhere.
You may email the webmaster at [email protected] with further comments.
Ifly4food
Moderator

 

[FL000]

Hey IFF...privately owned??? I think Mark just got through selling about $5000 worth of stock!

Just kidding, man. You're doing a good job.

FL000

 

[kilomike]

Thank you RJ pilot for backing me up on ifly4food. Some people just make you wonder and shake your head.

 

[raiseup]

All the security in the world will not stop the criminals who wish to bring us harm. The solution lies in the reason why they wish to do so. Is it because we have these cool airplanes the reason why we are disliked in other parts of the world? I think not, there in lies the answer. If just for a moment we, as Americans, can look at the bigger picture and solve this riddle we will live in a much safer world. Just a thought................

 

[publisher]

Good debate

For the most part, it wa good to see Avbug back joyfully filling the internet with well sought prose only to run head on into ifly4food. At least some thinking going on and mercy to those who chose to get in the middle of them.

El Al is always pointed to as the picture of perfection in these matters. What would concern me is what confronts them. We have a secure airline in an insecure world.

While aircraft make good targets, we should all be concerned that this does not come to our malls, our schools, our parks, our musems, our concerts, our ballgames, etc.

We can have safer aircraft and airlines, I just hope that it remains safe to get there. Israel should be an excellent example to us all. They will attack our Freedom with our freedom. Yesterdays aircraft will be tomorrows semi-trailer truck. We must travel with vigilance for we are in harms way.

 

[ifly4food]

Hey IFF...privately owned??? I think Mark just got through selling about $5000 worth of stock!

Just kidding, man. You're doing a good job.

FL000

Yea, but it was a minority share!