Qualified to fly.....

[Singlecoil]

Wasn't it Benjamin Franklin that said, "Never argue with an idiot, a bystander won't be able to tell the difference."

 

[PCL_128]

If you really think that getting through the new doors is impossible, you must be smoking some really funky stuff. No matter how well they design a door, there will always be ways to get through it.

APSA conducted tests on the new doors and found that you can get through in a couple of minutes using only things that can legally be brought on board an aircraft. They have declined to say how exactly they did it for obvious security reasons, but it can be done quite easily. The fact remains that any determined terrorist is going to find a way onto the flight deck. Thinking that the pax are going to be able to stop them is a very risky bet. If the terrorists managed to smuggle some firearms onboard, then the pax would be essentially helpless. The pilots are the last defense.

ifly4food:

You claim that I refuse to see the other side of the issues. I would submit that you do the exact same thing. Heck, almost everyone does! Do you see the other side of the RJDC issue? Judging by most of your posts, I would say not. All of us have our opinions, and all of us are willing to defend them.

Dieterly's post was not a defense of his opinion, it was an attack on me personally (notice his reference to PFT which has nothing to do with this conversation). You say that I have insulted people on this board, but I would challenge you to find one case where I insulted someone without them first insulting me.

 

[AWACoff]

I think the psych tests would be a great thing prior to arming pilots. Those pilots who are unable to keep the cockpit door closed at any cost should not have the option of having a firearm available while in flight. It is not even up to debate...EVEN IF it's your best friend getting murdered behind that door, you CANNOT open it. You are risking the entire aircraft and possibly lives on the ground. I am completely befuddled when I hear people time and again say, "well what if it was your best friend/wife/child/etc.". They just don't seem to understand. I am all for voluntary arming of pilots. The new improved doors won't stop a dedicated terrorist. I highly doubt a 9/11 will happen again. That doesn't mean we shouldn't cover all of our bases however by arming pilots in the cockpit. Let them shoot us down with SAMs, blow us up with a bomb...but don't let them use the airplane itself as the primary weapon.

 

[rfeathe1]

For those of you who worry about a pistol accidently firing & maybe striking the pilot or copilot or doing other damage I say issue them revolvers instead of semi automatic weapons. A .45 or .44 caliber six shot revolver is much safer than a semi automatic. THINK ABOUT IT!

 

[JRSLim]

One bullet Barney

Well I have no airline experience to talk from, but here's my outside view. Although there are a lot of valid points that guns may not be any good against certain threats etc, and that in some ways it is not as important as employment issues...
I think that having pilots armed is a good idea. I don't see it as being a 'cowboy' move as much as a last resort. We never know what will happen in any situation, but in a time of threat, if the situation came to a point where a firearm would be useful but wasn't available, that would be worse than having a firearm in a useless situation. There always exceptions, but most airline pilots are already in charge of the well being for hundreds of people, and should be caplable of making good judgement calls in difficult situations. Yes adrenelin can change perspective, but we as aviators train ourselves to think about scenerios in advance and how to react to them. Plus even though terrorist are serious and determined, armed pilots would serve as an additional deterrent.

Interesting sidenote: My om and I were looking through some old clippings. Found an article from 1963 afeter a hijacking to Cuba where Kennedy said that something must be done to reinforce cockpit doors. Talk about your barn doors.


Shaun

 

[ifly4food]

If you really think that getting through the new doors is impossible, you must be smoking some really funky stuff. No matter how well they design a door, there will always be ways to get through it...

Then I guess I'm smoking some really funky stuff. I'll defer to your years of experience and wisdom, and assume you're right on this one.

...ifly4food:

You claim that I refuse to see the other side of the issues. I would submit that you do the exact same thing. Heck, almost everyone does! Do you see the other side of the RJDC issue? Judging by most of your posts, I would say not. All of us have our opinions, and all of us are willing to defend them.

Dieterly's post was not a defense of his opinion, it was an attack on me personally (notice his reference to PFT which has nothing to do with this conversation). You say that I have insulted people on this board, but I would challenge you to find one case where I insulted someone without them first insulting me.

I didn't really expect you to take my advice. Some people have to learn things the hard way.

One question: why does his PFT remark bother you? Correct me if I'm wrong, but to get into Pinnacle with your low time you had to pay. If it didn't bother you then, why does it bother you now? I could see you being mad if he insulted you for something that wasn't true, but if you did it why be upset? It was your choice.
Maybe because it compromises your high and mighty attitude about the RJDC and it's supporters?

 

[PCL_128]

I didn't really expect you to take my advice. Some people have to learn things the hard way.

No, I'm not going to take your advice because I view it as being highly hypocritical. You defend your positions just as I do, yet you expect me to back down and acknowledge your supposed higher intellect.

One question: why does his PFT remark bother you? Correct me if I'm wrong, but to get into Pinnacle with your low time you had to pay. If it didn't bother you then, why does it bother you now? I could see you being mad if he insulted you for something that wasn't true, but if you did it why be upset? It was your choice.
Maybe because it compromises your high and mighty attitude about the RJDC and it's supporters?

I don't see how it has anything to do with my views on the RJDC, but think what you want. No, I did not have to pay Pinnacle a dime to get hired there. I believe his reference to PFT was because I worked at Gulfstream before going to Pinnacle. The PFT reference bothered me because some people here use PFT as a way to try to discredit people. Anytime a thread gets heated, they say "Don't listen to him, he PFT'ed." If Dieterly wants to discuss PFT, then do it on another thread. This thread is about armed pilots, not PFT. We've beaten the PFT horse to death, and I have made no attempt to hide the fact that I went to Gulfstream. If you have a problem with me PFTing, then so be it. I really don't care. Just don't bring it up whenever you see me posting on a thread. It's childish.

 

[Typhoon1244]

This thread is about armed pilots...

To some degree, it's also about ALPA's inability to keep its "eye on the ball." Serious security issues, thousands of furloughs, mainline vs. RJ issues tearing the union apart...and what did I see article after article about in Air Line Pilot? Changing the "Age 60" law.

Captain Woerth(less) is the epitome of "fiddling as Rome burns."

ALPA's current stance on the "armed pilots" issue is that we should keep a handgun in a locked box which is bolted to the cockpit structure. You might as well not have a gun at all for all the good that would do you if some terrorist broke down the door and caught you by surprise.

Still...the Japanese didn't bomb Pearl Harbor twice. I honestly don't think another 9/11-style attack is coming. Mark my words: they're going to hit us some place we don't have our media attention focused.

 

[PCL_128]

ALPA's current stance on the "armed pilots" issue is that we should keep a handgun in a locked box which is bolted to the cockpit structure.

That is not true at all. ALPA's stance is that the firearm be carried in a locked box in your overnight bag when travelling to and from the airport. When on the flight deck the firearm would be carried in a holster.

 

[Typhoon1244]

That is not true at all. ALPA's stance is that the firearm be carried in a locked box in your overnight bag when travelling to and from the airport. When on the flight deck the firearm would be carried in a holster.

Not according to our resident member of ALPA's "firearms" committee. The FAA and TSA aren't going for the idea of pilots walking around with guns.

 

[Loafman]

I guess what I should have said, is that I was worried someone would be able to pick out a pilot that was carrying a weapon and grab it in the terminal. With it hidden and locked it can't just be grabbed and used. That is what I liked about the rule.

Never mind the fact that every military and law enforcement firearm safety study conducted in the last 100 years found that the safest, most effective means of carrying a sidearm is concealed-on-person. Lock boxes are just ways of advertising "look at me, TSA made me carry this gun in a conspicuous container"

All this armed pilot crap becomes a moot point when the wacko's figure out that it is FAR easier to infiltrate a cargo ramp during the chaos of a package sort and stow away on a much larger aircraft without passengers, cabin crew, or in most cases without a cockpit door of ANY kind. If anyone needs guns, the freight guys do, due to the lack of other protections.

 

[PCL_128]

Not according to our resident member of ALPA's "firearms" committee. The FAA and TSA aren't going for the idea of pilots walking around with guns.

Here is a letter that ALPA's President sent to the TSA administrator about this subject: http://www.alpa.org/alpa/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=2245

It states that ALPA's position is that it supports the screening requirements, but would prefer that pilots be able to carry the firearms at all times rather than use a lockbox. This was just posted on ALPA's website today.

The TSA is pushing for a program that requires pilots to carry their firearms in a locked box when not on the flight deck. Up until now ALPA had not shown any opposition to this. Thankfully they are now fighting for personal carry. Check out ALPA's website and APSA's website for details on all of this.

http://www.alpa.org
http://www.secure-skies.org

 

[Loafman]

Guns in the cockpit is still not as much of a priority as other more important issues. Odds of getting hijacked are less than being struck by lightning. Odds of getting furloghed if this industry can't get it's head out of it's collective a$$, are better than getting hit with a beer bottle in a bar fight. And THATS what this thread is about. ALPA's priorities.

 

[PCL_128]

Guns in the cockpit is still not as much of a priority as other more important issues. Odds of getting hijacked are less than being struck by lightning. Odds of getting furloghed if this industry can't get it's head out of it's collective a$$, are better than getting hit with a beer bottle in a bar fight. And THATS what this thread is about. ALPA's priorities.

Perhaps you haven't heard ALPA's motto. Here's a reminder: "Schedule with safety." ALPA's number one priority is safety, just as it should be. Everything else is secondary. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't worry about the other issues; it just means that ALPA cannot ignore that arming pilots is an important issue. The safety of the flying public is the most important issue.

You're right that the odds of getting hijacked right now are very low. The odds of an engine failure right at V1 in Cat II conditions with a 25 knot crosswind are very low also, but that doesn't mean that we don't train for it. No matter how low the odds are, there is still the possibility that a flight could be hijacked and we need to do everything we can to make sure that pilots will be armed to defend their flight decks. Doing otherwise is just reckless.

 

[Loafman]

If you want to play odds, once they implement this TSA bastardized program, what are the odds that a hijacked flight will even have one of these armed pilots on it, seeing that it is voluntary and half of us won't apply, and FAR less than the half that do will make it through the draconian screening process? I'm still betting on the huge a$$ security hole in the cargo ramp. Ask FedEx about hijackers...

 

[mackinhoes]

This thread is about ALPA's priorities. ALPA's schedule with safety motto arose from management making pilot's fly shoddy equipment that was poorly maintained when they had not slept for days. It had nothing to do with terrorists. (That is government's job.)

The next coordinated terrorist attack (if/when there is one) will not be airplane related. It will be in some other high-profile, high-shock value area of American society. Someplace where people have let their guard down - whether complacency, or simply because it has been so long since 9-11.

The unfunded security mandate is a big millstone around the necks of the already weak airlines.

How is it that GBush can find $10 billion to help Turkey in exchange for us staging troops there, but he can't help the airlines stay in business with the $6 billion that congress earmarked for the airlines? WTF?

Anyone besides me going to vote for someone else besides Bush? (sorry, that is not what this thread is about)

 

[PCL_128]

Originally posted by Loafman I'm still betting on the huge a$$ security hole in the cargo ramp. Ask FedEx about hijackers... [/B]

ALPA and APSA are working hard on this loophole. There is legislation currently pending in the House of Reps that would close the cargo loophole so that cargo pilots could also carry.

 

[PCL_128]

The next coordinated terrorist attack (if/when there is one) will not be airplane related. It will be in some other high-profile, high-shock value area of American society.

You state that like it is fact. That is only your opinion on where the next attack will be. We can't be sure about that. I for one am not willing to take the risk. The American people aren't either. The last poll showed that 75% of the public is in favor of arming pilots. They don't seem to be so sure that the skies are completely safe.

 

[Singlecoil]

How is it that GBush can find $10 billion to help Turkey in exchange for us staging troops there, but he can't help the airlines stay in business with the $6 billion that congress earmarked for the airlines? WTF?

Let's not forget $7.8 billion for a ballistic missle defense system. The system that won't stop dirty bombs, nuclear weapons brought into the country via container ships, biological attacks, or cruise missiles.

 

[Cardinal]

Let's not forget $7.8 billion for a ballistic missle defense system. The system that won't stop dirty bombs, nuclear weapons brought into the country via container ships, biological attacks, or cruise missiles.

I believe that is why they refer to it as a Ballistic Missile Defense System. But I hear the Container Ship Defense Torpedo System may be fully funded next fiscal year.