Deter the general public? From what? Unless you believe the general public plan to hijack aircraft? The 'security' of which you're so enamoured certainly won't deter those with nefarious intent. Why would they bother trying to walk a prohibited item on board when there's so many other things that are at least as effective as a pocket knife, or pair of scissors, or a knitting needle, or a screwdriver, or a spanner etc etc etc ad nauseum - and not restricted? And even if you make the list of restricted items so comprehensive that those on board are naked, you still won't stop weaponry getting on board. Either hidden in an orifice, or secreted earlier via one of the thousand of occupations that have access to aircraft on the ground. They can't stop prohibited items getting into a maximum security prison with limited population so why would anyone think 'security' will be successful in the open environment of the rest of the world?
Those who plan to take over an aircraft certainly won't be bothered by 'security'. In many ways it's easier now than it was before the paranoia set in:
* Crew no longer have items that previously would have been available to defend themselves courtesy of 'security'.
* Ditto pax who are also relieved of such things, also courtesy of 'security'.
* No cockpit visitors to obstruct access to the flight crew, either passively or actively.
* A nice, lockable door giving splendid isolation to Mr Nasty & cohorts once they get in.
* They can still 'game the system' ie send many members of the gang for many flights before hand. Some may be caught, others won't be. Those who pass through - & the items that pass through with them - are the ones used for the main event.
* Additional 'security' checks prior to training, or required for the issue of a pilot licence. Meanwhile you don't need much more than an 15 or 30 mins to learn enough to crash an aircraft where you want, let alone the licence. Planning to ban introductory flights? Or the sale of handheld GPS?
Instead we now have the stupidity of:
* People being refused access back to the same aircraft they flew in on because they don't have a 'ticket' - even though the charter or private flight doesn't use tickets, they're in the company of the pilot that flew them in and have flown in from an aerodrome that doesn't have or require 'security'.
* Nursing mothers with bottles of expressed milk having to drink the contents to prove it's not a poison of some sort.
* Medical equipment being searched for explosives even though the same equipment flew in on the same ambulance aircraft not 30 minutes before. No, it wasn't subject to an explosives test then. That sort of search equipment isn't available at most GA aerodromes nor is it mandated.
* Ditto 'security' threatening to disallow medical equipment because it has sharp items such as scalpels & needles. Duhh....of course there's sharp items - it's medical equipment for an ambulance aircraft, and sharp items are an integral part of medical supplies.
* How about having to fix better locks to aircraft as has been mandated in some places. That could make a big difference....if a miscreant forgets to bring his bolt cutters. Or a brick.
Every time we respond by eroding more & more of the previous freedoms we enjoyed then the terrorists win just a little bit more. Eventually we end up in a society indistinguishable from those coercive & restrictive societies we once opposed. All in the name of 'preserving freedom', of course.
The WTC hijackers wouldn't have been stopped by our current 'security'. They used a box cutter? So now they use a piece of glass from the duty free, or a mirror or whatever.
They trained at a sim. centre? Now they use M$ flight sim + popular add-ons to learn sufficient to provide steering cues to the a/p.
They need to navigate? They must be quaking in their boots that some bureaucrat will think to ban road maps.
Identity cards or similar? They wouldn't have been caught by any system currently in place or proposed. Even in our current high-anxiety state, a country *with* an ID card system couldn't stop a seperatist movement from bombing them.
The tragic event that instigated this paranoia has led to at least one beneficial change: It's no longer the received wisdom to acquiesce to a hijacker. Now the prevailing opinion from authorities, crew & pax supports all occupants using maximum & aggressive resistance to such an event. It's arguable that had that been the case on the WTC flights then the outcome would have been different.
Only now the only people likely to save the a/c are forcibly disarmed.
Last edited by Tinstaafl; 12th Dec 2004 at 22:00.