Reporters smuggle knives onto 14 flights

[DarnNearaJet]

Hard to believe some people still don't get it.

"What if a hijacker held a knife to an F/A's throat?"
Too bad, maintain control of the aircraft.

"What if a pilot misses the hijacker and injures someone in the cabin?"
1) How can you miss someone standing in a doorway 3 feet behind you? (What kind of training do you need for that for God's sake?)
2) OK, let's sacrifice the entire a/c and 3,000 people on the ground because of the minor risk that someone in the cabin might take a stray bullet.

"Pilots should concentrate on flying the a/c"
It's hard to fly the a/c when your throat's been cut from behind. It's also hard to fly the a/c when someone is breaking through the cockpit door.

"What if the gun gets into the hijackers' hands?"
How?


Oh well, I guess its better to let the a/c be shot down by an F-16 than to allow pilots to be armed.

PS: I am a New England liberal and anti-gun in general.

 

[scarface]

To follow up on the United response how do the reporters get legal waivers to do this stuff? What if pilots decided to run their own security check by trying to smuggle weapons on board? I'm sure the repurcussions would be quite severe. It just makes me nervous when reporters capriciously set out to pentrate defenses and then publish the locations and the strategy. Oh well, I'm sure the bad guys don't read our papers.

 

[gsrcrsx68]

<<1) How can you miss someone standing in a doorway 3 feet behind you? (What kind of training do you need for that for God's sake?)>>

Train all you want. A pistol shot is never a given. On top of that what the bullet does after it strikes anything is anybodies guess. So if there is a serious gunfight from the cockpit back, you can bet there are gonna be stray bullets.

Also you can bet a weapon on board is a target for anyone trying to take over. Weapons can certainly be taken away from those with them. Easy example...Hijacker holds edged weapon to FA throat, FAM stands up pulls gun, gets attacked by 4 or 5 other guys. And that is 2 seconds of thought on my part. Those people can sit around and think about it for as long as it takes to come up with a really good plan.

That said, I am glad pilots can have guns. Just another deterent. But if you ever see a pilot pointing his gun back in to the cabin at a terrorist, I suggest you try to get small, not assume the bullet will hit its target or stop when it does!

 

[SpeedRacer]

"Slide33" give it a rest.

I have NEVER been impressed with ANY "Military Cop" in my 10 years in the military. You think your training, judgement and experience far exceeds what any professional pilot could attain through an intitial and annual scheduled firearms course? I recall soooo many cops screwing up on the job, from discharging their weapons accidentally to loosing their M-16 rifles, you guys aren't perfect by any standards.....

You also don't realize that any flight crewmember is trained and ready to handle ANY emergency by themselves. . It doesn't take two to handle emergencies in every scenario. If a bad guy was trying to come in I'll expect the Captain direct me to shoot anybody that forces their way in while he gets us down - by himself. He can work the radio, run a checklist and even get the gear and flaps down. It's not rocket science. He can reach across the instrument panel......

You said:

I think your argument against inaccesible cockpits is pretty weak. I am very confident that the engineering technology exists today to design a cockpit door that can prevent unwanted entry.

Would you care to bet your life, your passengers and thousands of innocent people on the ground with some "low cost bidder's" inaccessible door? Not me, I'm signing up for weapons training as soon as it's offered, we've already had one nut (Auborn Calloway) try to hijack one of our FedEx DC-10's.........

You also said:

Pax are willing to fight back now.

Once again, I would not be willing to relieve the final responsibilty of security to my passengers!! What if you're carrying a bunch of 4-H kids or elderly tourists?! You could never count on your passengers be willing to fight back 100% of the time......But I'm sitting nice and neat in my locked cockpit, waiting for the calvary (the elderly passengers and kids in your case) to save the day and praying that they can't kick in the cockpit door........Geez......

Okay, I'll give it rest now....Adios

 

[1900laker]

_______

I think your argument against inaccesible cockpits is pretty weak. I am very confident that the engineering technology exists today to design a cockpit door that can prevent unwanted entry. The reason these are currently "unavailable" is they cost
_______


Slide, Can you give me a brief description of your airline experience. I might be off-base, but my guess you may not be an airline pilot. Am I correct? Not a slam here, just trying to see if we are working from the same point of view. If not, I will try best to explain it.

My point about the doors was not that they are not technological possible, they currently are not even operationally possible. Until I get issued piddle packs to relieve myself sometime during that 4 hour flight, that door is going to have to open to allow flight crew to use the lavs. As I said before, there is no such thing as an impenetrable door that will have to be opened during flight. If the terrorist is sitting in row 1, there is a distinct possibility that he is going to make his way in the cockpit in the brief time that door is open.

And in terms of the doors, even if there is a way of installing destruction proof doors, and an operational way of keeping them shut from engine start to shutdown, all of this is going to take a pretty long time to make happen. But another hijacking could occur tomorrow for all we know. Why not be prepared. I think the risks associated are pale in light of the consequences.

The other point I wanted to make is that firearms on the flightdeck are for one purpose; saving the people on the GROUND not the airplane. When we are saying last line of defense, we are talking about defending against becoming the terrorist's ultimate weapon.

Rules of Engagement must be a familiar term for you having been in the military. It would read something like.."under no circumstance will the flight crew open the cockpit door during a disturbance in the cabin."

 

[slide33]

Well, since I did just post I'm active duty mil. - your hunch is absolutley correct. I am not an airline pilot. And I'm not a military cop either SpdRcr.

We could verbally spar all year on this. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. Here are my points and I'll leave it at that.

I understand and agree with a lot of your ideas. Basically, I feel that firearms in the cockpit carry a greater overall risk to the a/c and people on the ground than reinforced cockpit doors and air marshalls.

and here's a tid-bit from today's paper:

"The Federal Aviation Administration said yesterday that manufacturers and airlines agreed that an April 9 deadline to install the new doors could be met."

The heads of 21 airlines, which opposed the Senate measure, sent a letter to each senator yesterday saying they wanted to discuss the idea of arming pilots with Congress and the administration.

"While we are spending literally billions of dollars to keep dangerous weapons off of aircraft, the idea of intentionally introducing thousands of deadly weapons into the system appears to be dangerously counterproductive," the letter said.

 

[1900laker]

Slide,

Your right, we could go on debating this for a year.

I have read and heard hundreds of opinions of those opposed to arming airline pilots. And guess what the majority of them have in common. They are not airline pilots.

I can't understand why we don't trust the professional airline pilots of america to make the best informed decision about this issue. When there is an issue on Global warming, or HIV, or West Nile, we as a nation always run to the experts to make the policy. Who better would be able to answer the question than an experienced airline pilot whether they thought they could maintain control of the aircraft while wielding a firearm if necessary.

I hear your statements about the doors, but again, I have asked over and over, and not just you, but how are we supposed to operate that aircraft for the long hours that we do, and not have a method of relieving bladders, having access to more fluids if we get dehydrated, etc? Noone yet has given a good answer to that question.

But I guess that all this is moot anyways. The senate approved the bill by a vote of over 80 senators in favor and in the house of over 300 in favor of arming pilots on a 2% test basis. Over 75% of ALPA pilots polled were in favor as well. So while the press has not listened to the professionals, apparently congress has.