The presence of Sky Marshalls on some transatlantic flights is not a prudent measure by the UK Govt, but pandering to the requirements of G Dubbya. As I understand it from the official releases so far, its either armed guards or you don't fly in out airspace! Okay, not a bad idea with non-lethal weapons, but howsabout some effort into getting a sensible security program up and running with more widespread consultation.
Like some of the other posters, I would be very uncomfortable having UK cops with handguns anywhere near my aircraft, irrelevant of training and previous attachments. I would be far happier with a few ex-SF guys. The big difference in the UK is very few firearms trained police have operational experience, whereas the Mil guys do, and have often been in potential and actual armed confrontations. If the choice is highly trained or highly trained with experience, I know which I would go for.
Whilst some of the security arrangements bought in post 9/11 (some of which have been operating in the UK for years) are sensible, some are just plain crazy. A secondhand story from an aquitance. One of his colleagues was stopped from carrying his Leatherman on a flight despite protesting it was a piece of essential equipment for flight crew. Fair enough I guess, but then before departure, he is handed a couple of plastic bags with small 'sharp instruments' that belonged to passengers and which had to stay in his safe keeping until after de-planing and return to the pax. Logic? there aint none!
Back to the point in hand. Anybody know for definate if the flight crew will know if their flight has Sky Marshalls aboard? If not, is this not (hypothetically) risky ground as far as the ANO is concerned?
Worried of Warwickshire