From Murray_NN Security Guard at LHR

[Murray_NN]

I made a posting here about security last year and had large amounts of replies that suggested the security at LHR and many BAA airports were OTT. At end I had to give up because I had so much opposition from many pilots all over the world.

I even remember RAW DATA was arguing with me that pilots should not be searched etc.

I am apalled at the tragedies in USA. But it comes to us (LHR Guards) as no surpise.
It is well known in our section that the two crews that most resisted our searching procedures were the Americans and the French Canadians. When we processed American & Canadian crews before the incident, there was an air of impression that they would never be the targets because they felt so secure and felt above the world.

I feel sorry for USA and hope they recover to the full.

But please realise that Security at the airports are for your OWN protection. It will be your OWN interest to comply with us. I know some of us can be annoying and I'm not denying that. But remember once again! ITS FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY!!!

Take care of yourselves and your luggage!!!

[throber69]

Its hardley as if crews are going to bring knives and guns aboard to hijack a plane they already have control of!!!

They just probably did n't want the hosties to see the top porn they were taking home to the wife!!

Search the pax search the crew but if people are that determined they will use the plastic cutlery we now have suffer, thanks again Mr Bin Liner!!


LOVE AND KISSES THROBER 69

[152]

Following on from the points of security at LHR. I am an employee at LHR and overall think that the security is far better than other airports, both here and in the US, however I strongly feel that Police Officers and Customs staff should also be searched when going 'airside'.

Condolences to all for last weeks dreadfull events.


152 :(

[Raw Data]

Oh, do wake up Murray, no wonder you are still a security guard. Please explain to us how rigorous searching of crews would have helped in this case. In fact, explain how ANY searching of crews AT ALL would have prevented this.

When you have finished doing that, explain to us how the current measures will help, when a terrorist armed with a balpoint pen could easily kill people (or a plastic knife from a meal tray, or a piece of sharp trim removed from the aircraft, etc).

All the current measures do is make the public feel better. If you knew anything about security, you would understand all this...

The only sure way to prevent this in future is to either stop terrorists getting on aircraft (virtually impossible), or isolate the flight deck (much better idea).

Oh, and in future try reading those old threads before making assumptions about what I said.

[LatviaCalling]

Well, I have a feeling that many European countries, including the U.K. will re-intitute the passport stamping on departure system.

When I first came to Europe from the U.S. eight years ago, you also had to go through passport control when you were leaving a country. In the past few years, all you have to do is to go through the security gate and you're home free. Yes, on inernational flights you have to show your passport to the frazzled girl at the airline check-in counter, but what does she know? She is not an expert in forged passports or visas.

In the U.K. I have had instances when I have checked my luggage and AFTER going through the security check, been politely approached by Crown Agents and taken to a room where they examined my luggage piece by piece, including underpants. Hats off!

To wind this thing up, I definitely think that European security is much better than the American counterpart. The last time I left the U.S. to come back to Europe, all my friends and relatives, including their dog, were allowed to accompany my to the departure gate and wave bye-bye.

In Europe waving bye-bye means just before you pass the security and go into the transit terminal. I'm not saying that improvements can't be made in Europe, but American security, although I am an American, is (or was) a joke.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

So tell us, Murray, what's your background that you should lecture us in such a way? Ideally, you should be ex Military Police or RAF Regiment or somesuch, with specialist knowledge of terrorist activities, but my guess is you're not. Let's not fool each other, Murray. You and your kind are a sop and a comfort to the travelling public, but we, the aircrew, can see straight through you. We always did. Nothing in the job you do could have prevented the events of last Tuesday. Nothing. Right now, we don't need lectures from you. Have you got that?

[Right Seat]

When I used to do Airport Security in Aus we did screen all crew bags etc, but were told it was just a formality and nothing more. Under no circumstances we were to question pilots belongings. Of course a gun would have done more than raise a few eyebrows but the chances of that happening werent that great.
Tools and small leatherman type knives are common in pilot nav bags and are also very handy.

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Right Seat ]

[aviator]

I went through crew security at LHR regularly up untill a couple of years ago.

What we found was that is was a lot more thorough and intrusive than when we went through the regular security as a passenger.

So, yes, we did find that odd, and did resent it.

[gaterbait]

Drop the ban on registered firearms carriers. On the flight that crashed near pittsburg, reports are that the pax tried to take back the acft. if any one of them had been armed, there might have been a totally different outcome.

[Drop and Stop]

Good one gaterbait, a step in the right direction! :rolleyes: What, pray tell, would of stopped the terrorists from carrying firearms. At least 4 terrorists per aircraft .... who do you think you are ? Rambo?

I think Murry's post was in light of the uncomfirmed reports of arrests in NYC of people attempting to pass themselves off as pilots (in uniform + fake ID).

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Drop and Stop ]

[innuendo]

A few years ago among the things stolen from a pilots home that was burgled was both his uniforms. I suppose that could be justification for inspecting crews, not to mention the all too many (although decreasing) instances of seeing crew bags unattended in hotel lobbies while their owners are getting a coffee somewhere.
Searching crews seems non productive unless they are not what they seem. ID's can, I suppose be faked.

[bjcc]

So Mr 152, You feel strongly that a Police Officer or Customs Officer should be searched do you? What a silly man! First you might have noticed, that many Heathrow Officers carry firearms. So what are you going to do with them? Call the police, who would have to go through a search and in turn have thier firearm, baton and tear gas seized. Just think in 20 minutes the BAA would have enough weapons to start WW3, and every Policeman held for questioning. Good idea! I feel sure, if you have a sensible think you will realise that the chances of a policeman being a terrorist are very low. Can the same be said of the BAA? Not really, thier vetting having been shown on numerous occations to be lacking. The long and short of it, if a police officer on duty is carring a weapon of offence, he is authorised to do so, and there is nothing a private security firm like the BAA can do about it, nor I'm sure would they officaly like to. On a slightly more important note, perhaps if the BAA had paid more attention to thier job of searching pax, they may have found the bomb destined for the el al flight some years ago, rather than letting el als own security do it. I find that more worrying!

[jellybaby]

BJCC , you seem to miss the point made by 152 .
EVERYONE should be subject to the same security search.I too work at a BAA airport and everyday see HM Immigration,HM Customs,BAA security all pass through the metal detectors and then waved through,without any search !
Any items they have with them are NOT subject to the X-Ray machine.
Who is to say that they are not carrying anything illegal ?

[bjcc]

Jellybabe...
No I haven't missed the point, he specificly mentioned Police and customs. You mention Immigration and BAA in addition, yes BAA should be searched. Customs and Police, if carring something which would be illegal for you, would not be for them, ie, in the case of police a firearm. They are specificly permitted to do so. Customs if they have seized one are the same. The point being so you search a police officer, and find say a tear gas spray....so then what are you going to do? Nothing, because the officer is permitted to carry it. It is therefore a waste of resorces, that should be used to search the threat, not the people there to deter the threat.

[jellybaby]

Bjcc, I do not have a problem with Police Officers on duty either armed or not !.
I do have a problem however with people like HM Immigration,HM Customs and BAA security who don't even bother to show that they are prepared to comply with a search.
They seem to justify bypassing a search with an assumption that "their" job rates them to be beyond the law !

[ragspanner]

Raw data,
your smug self satisfied tone is appalling & as for the inane insults !.
Do you genuinely believe that an anti hijack door makes a pressurised fuselage indistructable ?. The number of incidents prevented by EL AL security staff attests to the fact that well equiped,trained & motivated security staff 'can' stop EODs or armed passengers being allowed to board.
May i suggest that it is ingrained & blinkered attitudes such as yours that prevent a more pluralistic approach to security. All agencies have a role to play,flight deck ,cabin crew & ground security staff.

[tonyryan]

Heathrow security at the control posts are the most arrogant and ignorant assh0les ever to crawl the planet. I've seen bus drivers mechanics and refuellers lightly frisked and then allowed drive a vehicle through airside with no inspection of it's contents. Meanwhile crews are subjected to the most degrading treatment, including having their personal effects opened despite no X-Ray indication of a security threat. This is done under the name of 'random inspection'. I have even witnessed a security officer at post 2 acutally open a tub of cleansing cream belonging to one of our cabin crew.

When will you idiots ever get it into your little heads that in all such terrorist cases the crews are the ones that end up the victim. Perpitrators of such crimes usually remain on the ground. In many countries, police vetting of cockpit and cabin crew occurs as part of the recruitment procedure, and they are unlikely to commit such crimes. Even if they want to, they can take control of the aircraft without use of weapons, of if needed, use the nice steel cutlery provided on board by the airline itself.

On the other hand we have an untold number of 'officials' including police officers and BAA security staff that have access to aircraft and it's baggage. Forged ID's and fake uniforms are relatively easy to create or obtain, so there should be great importance placed on ensuring such personnel are properly checked. Equally, any object other than official issue they carry airside should be treated in the same fashion as a passenger - no knives etc, and the same penalty for breaching the regulations.

What about aircraft mechanics - should they be allowed to bring Leatherman tools near an aircraft? Now things start getting stupid. As I sit there in the cockpit fully laden all ready to go waiting for the aircraft to be serviceable, the mechanic uses a combination tool to rectify the snag. If I tried to bring that tool through security, I would be stopped and have it taken from me.

Are you suggsting that I am a threat to security whilst the mechanic is not?

The biggest threat to our safety comes from those that have access to aircraft and don't travel on it.

Wake up you BAA Assh0les.

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: tonyryan ]

[152]

bjcc, point taken, but there is no need to hurl insults. This is supposed to be an intelligent debate.
You say police and customs should NOT be searched, well, the majority of police and customs that go through security are not armed. So I still feel that ALL customs staff are to be searched. In case you don't realise they actually walk through the archway metal detector with thier briefcase still in hand. As for police, armed or not, should still be searched, I accept your point that they are permitted to carry thier batons, tear gas and weapons but what about the items they are not permitted to carry. Well they have just got it airside havent they? Now they can pass it on! Do you know the components of a bomb? They are very small if carried separately. As for saying the chances of a policeman being a terrorist is low. Low is still a chance is it not? Until you say the chances of a policman being a terrorist is non existent, then they should be searched. Simple as that.

152 :mad:

PS. jellybaby, thanks for your support.

[rustbucket732]

RAW DATA
Oh, do wake up Murray, no wonder you are still a security guard.

What does this mean exactly. Security Guards are worthless scum? Maybe to you matey, but not to us who depend on them to actually help enforce Security.

Georgeablelovehowindia
Let's not fool each other, Murray. You and your kind are a sop and a comfort to the travelling public, but we, the aircrew, can see straight through you.

Golly, you may. But I certainly don't... why don't you reveal your pearls of wisdom? Shall we dispense of their services altogether? I can't believe the crap you just spowted.


Can't a profession deemed obviously so low by you guys have any respect? Thank Christ I don't fly in the UK anymore.

[flapsforty]

Without getting invloved in the argument here, and yes I greatly dislike having to get out of the crew transport at 0430 AM and lug my crew suitcase through the X-ray machine at LHR as well, I do want to state here that going through that checkpoint twice a month, I always find the security people there both friendly and courteous.

They did not make these silly rules, they enforce them, in in my experience a bit of courtesy from the crew goes a long way in smoothing thise whole silly procedure.

[Murray_NN]

Raw Data,

Its nice to hear from you again.
You are still the same arogant person as you were before.
If the death of six thousand people does not wake you up, then I cant think what will.

On the week before the attack I personally found 2 knives and a laser gun belonging to 3 different captains.

Who knows what they were there for?

Raw Data, for god's sake wake up and realise what has happened in the USA and just realise that we are here to enforce safety for you, for your pax and many more to mention.

I know much more about security than you think. I think its crazy not to search crews at all or to search them differently than paxs. Believe me we have saved lives at LHR.

Raw Data, I will not argue with you anymore because I think you are still the same person who cannot look beyond your own snobbish personality. Because you maybe a pilot, it does not automaticaly give you the right of being searched differently.

Who knows who was responsible for the attacks in usa. The hijackers could have hidden their weapons in the luggage of the crews. That is only a speculation but I hope that was not the case. With the sophistication of their planning who knows who brought the weapons on board? If any were used.

Take care RD.

[Hand Solo]

Well I would suggest that the operating Captains were unlikely to be using the knives and laser guns in a hijacking attempt. There are plenty of devices on board I could use if I wanted to do that! Many of the current restrictions on flight crew are, quite frankly, petty. If I want to kill the other guy I wont do it with the two inch blade swiss army knife in my bag.

By all means lets x-ray crew bags, perhaps something has been concealed in them when we're not looking. Lets have a thorough check of IDs, because any muppet can get a pilots uniform and we don't want them airside. Lets not try to kid ourselves that operating crew are going to hijack their won aircraft.

If we want to stop this sort of thing happening again then the first thing we need is profiling of pax El Al style. That does far more to defeat the terrorist threat than some underpaid and often disinterested security guard looking for a tiny concealed weapon.

[rover2701]

Are you all barking mad. The tragic events of last week are not enough. The mindless drivel from some sections of the aircrew who seem to think themselves above the rest and should not be subject to the same rules as the rest of the people who go airside for whatever reason astounds me. Fake uniforms fake IDs are easily obtainable. Why do object to a little inconvenience for gods sake. OK the events of the last week would not have been prevented by the search of aircrew, but terrorists are very inventive persons and who knows what ruse they will use in future. Get real chaps. Any security measure is better than none.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Raw Data]

ragspanner: if you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have noticed that I made no mention of the (in)destructability of pressurised containers, only the denial of access to the flight deck.

I am happy to comply with any security requirements that have a point to them. Sadly, most of the stuff we have to endure is more about political correctness, arse-covering and small-mindedness, Murray here being a good example. As I said to him, if you can show me a good reason, I will happily comply.

Rustbucket732: Murray wants to be a pilot, but does not appear to have made a lot of progress... hence my remark. I have a lot of time for security personnel, but only when they have some intelligence.

Murray_NN: You just don't get it, do you? Did the terrorists need weapons to crash the aircraft? NO! Nor does ANY pilot, all a pilot has to do is point the nose at the ground and advance the thrust levers. What, therefore, does it matter if a pilot has a knife???

As usual, you simply spout your organisational line without offering any evidence at all that your views make any sense whatsoever (which they don't). The minute you offer some sensible reasons for what you advocate, I will happily embrace them... but as you can't, I won't.

Now, why don't you try answering the points I made to you? Or anyone else, if anyone actually HAS some answers...

[babble]

Guys, remember who the enemy is. Guards and pilots are on the same side in this war!

Lets take this debate back to basics. What we are talking about here is how to counter the threat of terrorist "sleepers" who may try to get jobs reqiring airside access.

The most appropriate means to counter this threat depends on the jobs people do.

First it must be recognised that there are some jobs in which it would be possible to hijack or destroy an aircraft using only the tools nescessary for that job.

The most obvious of these jobs is flight crew. I am legally responsible for a piece of machinery which has the potential to be "the equivilent of a weapon of mass destruction". If I were a terrorist sleeper I could crash a passenger jet on a city center tomorrow morning. If the F/O were not a confederate I would have to take him out, but for a determined terrorist that would not be too difficult even without carrying any "prohibited articles" in a flight bag. There might even be a way I could survive.

Other jobs in this category include firearms authorised police officers and maintainance engineers (for reasons I will not go into).

For such staff, the only defense is vetting: the authorities must obtain the highest possible assurance that these staff are not terrorists. It follows that all staff in this category must be subject to the most rigourous government positive vetting procedures. Perhaps also staff responsible for securing catering supplies and any staff who need to dirve a vehiecle from land to air side and who have access to aircraft (e.g tanker drivers) would also need to be in this category.

For positive vetted staff, there is little marginal value in body searches at validation points since such staff have the means to destroy an aircraft anyway. Putting bags on the x ray machine would still be useful for the owner's own benefit in case it had been tampered with. Valdation point control for positive vetted staff should concentrate on veryfying identity. Technology such as retinal scanning may be useful here.

Full positive vetting is however complex and costly. It can also be politically senstive in relation to equal opportunities legislation.

For ALL other airside staff who are not positive vetted, validation point control must concentrate on search.

In summary, we need a scheme in which the requirement to search staff depends on whether the staff member has positive vetted status. The requirement for positive vetting in turn depends on the job category.

[Bally Heck]

Oh Come on ...children, children.

Poor old Murray. He has a job to do by statute. Almost everyone who goes airside is subject to search. I agree that searching armed police officers for arms is a bit of a waste of time. Security guards are searched by their colleagues. As for Customs and immigration, I see no reason why they should not be searched.

As for aircrew. Why not? I don't object to being searched. I am always civil to the guards, and they are always civil to me. Does it require an incident where terrorists armed to the teeth and disguised as aircrew walk straight through security unsearched to change your minds?

I happen to know that security guards at BAA airports are very well and recurently trained. They do watch the x-ray monitors because many of them have software which will plant virtual weapons in luggage and to slag this guy off for doing his job is just incredible given this weeks events. I can hardly believe I am hearing this. And from a forum moderator too.

tonyryan, How can you accuse security of being arrogant after posting that tirade?

Shame on you all.

[Murray_NN]

RawData I hope you are reading how many ppl think you are wrong.

[Feetwet]

find it terribly sad that some Flight crew members feel that they should not be subject to some security searches. Maybe it has bypassed some of you that you are NOT the only crew members onboard an aircraft (or maybe flying newspapers or mail in the twighlight hours has made you forget).

However many airlines have crewmembers from many different backgrounds.

It it conceivable that there COULD be a 'sleeper' working as a crewmember on any of those Airlines.

Having ALL crew clear security helps us ALL be in a safer environment.

All of the personal abuse on this thread is distasteful, maybe professional courtesy is a term forgotten by some people. We are all currently in a work environment which is very stressfull. We dont need to add to it ourselves. :confused:

[FlapsOne]

Murray

I am a pilot who has always carried a knife (23 years). Why? I'll tell you.

We wear a 5 point harness which come together in a single quick release fastening (QRF). Twice in my flying career this QRF had failed leaving me literally tied into the aircraft with no means of escape. The groundcrew have had to cut the harness to get me out and send the remaining bits of harness for analysis.

Now these incidents have happened, fortunately, in quiet moments at the end of a duty BUT, had they happened when the aircraft was on fire I would be dead.

So I carry it for that once in a lifetime
event that might save my life!

I do not object to security checks for for crew. After all, the baddies could well be holding my family hostage and getting me to carry something through for them, BUT GET REAL - as previously posted here, we seem to have entered a new age of the hijack and if a pilot is motivated to become a suicide 'hijacker' he/she could stroll through security in their underwear and NOTHING would stop the event taking place.

Security - YES PLEASE - but let's make it practical and not just a publicity stunt for pax and media. :mad:

[trolleydollylover]

I cannot believe the arrogance of some of the posters here.

Security is there for a reason, if it is unnecessary then why is it done all over the world.

You dont know who the staff really are. What security does is minimise the risks. Yes there are going to be rogues and we all know about the Silk Air disaster (although not definitive). Security checks are not going to stop all of the risks, but it is better than none. Lets get real, these people save lives.

My past job was anti-terrorist ops and everything that is done is a mark of prevention and a deterant. Everybody needs to be checked - finito.

It is not just weapons, IEDs, but drugs animals etc.

[bjcc]

Interesting.

For information, a police officer quite often has got a weapon of offence airside...Where do you think the tear gas, flick knives etc from pax go? As regards to things that aren't issued, well..whats more dangerous than a gun, or tear gas spary..or a batton? And what about a policeman who finds something laying around airside that is a weapon....are u expecting the BAA to detain a police officer and invetigate the circumstances? No...I thought not. And before you claim it doesn't happen....it does I was a Policeman at heathrow..so I know what I am talking about. As far as I am aware, the BAA are searched, Customs & Immigration are not....The reasons behind that, I don't know, as far as customs are concened probably because if they have seized something you can hardly expect a private security firm to then investigate it can you. Immigration, I agree with you.As regards to fake ID's well heathrow useds a swipe card system..difficult to forge....If a police officer did turn out to be a terrorist..well a search would not stop him handing over a gun to someone or using it himself or handing it to someone else.so how about stopping police going airside..go idea that.removes any possibility!

[reboot]

Tonyryan

Many of think a pilot using a leatherman in the flight deck is a threat to the security and saftey of the a/c.

Could someone delete this thread Raw Data's comments should not be left anywhere that the public can see them. The arrogance of some people is astouding.

[rustbucket732]

bally heck
I agree that searching armed police officers for arms is a bit of a waste of time.

Actually I was just about going to agree with you when I thought.. what if the officer was surreptiously carrying a gun to be later picked up airside by a terrorist?

Makes you think.

[Raw Data]

Not arrogance at all, reboot... just waiting for someone to justify the procedures. So far, nobody, including you, can come up with a sensible reason why pilots are searched. So instead of offering uninformed comment, try answering the points.

Like you, Murray_NN chooses to cover his inability to answer with childish point-scoring... such is the quality of some security staff...

By the way, a lot of you need to learn the difference between legitimate question and personal attack. As it happens, I go through security several times, every working day. I am ALWAYS courteous and helpful to the security staff, who after all have a job to do.

That doesn't change the fact that a lot of what they do is quite pointless, and the proof of this is the inability of one of their number to come up with a single, solitary good reason for what he or she does.

Allegedly professional people should be able to distingluish between useful, effective action and pointless window-dressing. So, without a lot of hope, I once again ask anyone (even Murray) to come up with some good reasons for their actions.

[Beausoleil]

On a recent flight (yesterday - won't say where or when) my carry on luggage wasn't searched. I thought it was supposed to be searched on all European flights now. Is that not true? If it should have been searched who should I notify?

Just a concerned and ignorant passenger. Sorry to raise a perhaps dumb question but don't know where else to ask it.

[rustbucket732]

RAW DATA
So far, nobody, including you, can come up with a sensible reason why pilots are searched.

As far as I can ascertain, airside whould be sterile as far as possible. Aircrew, like armed police need to be searched for one extremely good reason.

Imagine a scenario where Aircrew are not searched. Is it not conceivable that they might just be the delivery vehicle to get the weapon (or whatever, even drugs.. but I'm not going down that path) airside? And then taken over by another accomplice?

Fait Accompli as the frogs say.

[rustbucket732]

RAW DATA, this accomplice of course could be a passenger on another flight....

Aircrew could drop off weapon at designated point to be picked up by somebody else.

How you can't understand this is beyond me.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

rustbucket732, you asked for my "pearls of wisdom" so here they are. Some years back, my company "volunteered" me to captain an aircraft which was on charter to El Al. I have therefore experienced airline security Nirvana, first hand. I came away convinced that they really did know what they were doing and were truly professional. I have absolutely NO problems being security checked by the professionals of El Al!
I want their quality of security. If this means that Murray and his colleagues have to jack their standards up by 100% or collect their P45s then so be it.
As a practical tip, learned from El Al: When the flight deck door is open, for any reason, always detail a second cabin crew member to be facing outwards, to warn of anyone advancing towards the flight deck. Simple, yes? No, I hadn't thought of it either.
Finally, Murray, please stop these facile and patronising postings aimed at Raw Data. You are demeaning yourself and causing us to worry further.

[SunSeaSandfly]

Rustbucket,
You are right, sleepers can be anywhere, police, customs, cleaners, caterers, pilots , F/As, and, :eek: shock, horror, security guards.
Who's guarding the guards?

[Raw Data]

Aha! Finally, some common sense.

SSS is correct- and, more to the point, security staff are far more vulnerable to that sort of collusion than pilots are.

So, rustbucket, you are suggesting that a pilot would smuggle in a weapon for another to use? Leaving aside the obvious possibility that the pilot in question could end up being the victim of his own stupidity, can you point me at a SINGLE example of this happening? Thought not. By the way, have you ever witnessed the depth to which vehicles travelling landside/airside are searched? Do security open every meal container, or check every carton of juice for weapons? A lot of the time the stuff isn't even x-rayed. That should REALLY scare you.

Many of you seem to have difficulty reading, I have never suggested that pilots should not be searched, merely asked our resident "expert" Murray_NN to provide a rationale for this procedure. That he can't, tells you an awful lot about the state of aviation security...

I'll happily desist from this thread when someone can answer the points I have made... but I'm not holding my breath...

[rustbucket732]

RAW DATA
So, rustbucket, you are suggesting that a pilot would smuggle in a weapon for another to use? Leaving aside the obvious possibility that the pilot in question could end up being the victim of his own stupidity, can you point me at a SINGLE example of this happening? Thought not.

Can you point to me a previous happening of 180t airliners being slammed into the side of a building possibly by type-rated terrorists? Thought not.

I'm leaving this thread now. A tad too contentious for my liking :(

[NormanBates]

If we have secure cockpit doors this may not solve the problem. A terrorist seen by aircrew killing/torturing a flight attendant (viewed through the peephole or described via intercom) may, today or tomorrow, still coerce a crew member to open the door; on a variety of pretexts or promises (think about it). I believe cabin security is the issue. Air marshalls are expensive and arming every passenger with a weapon with non-skin penetrating projectiles is both expensive and a PR nightmare(so who gives a rat's arse about that you may say - as I do). On every commercial flight you would have either on or off-duty military personnel. I am suggesting that an option could be to specifically train certain military personnel in tactics for disabling terrorists (preferably permanently). When these people fly they will be specifically cleared to carry a specialist weapon and be there to assist on the day of your worst nightmare. This option is almost cost neutral. Comments please ladies and gentlemen!

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: NormanBates ]

[mutt]

Our last hijacking was conducted by an “immigration officer” and a “policeman”. In an airport where I can’t even wear steel toed Caterpillars through the security machine, they managed to bring two guns past “their security friends”. The London bound airliner ended up in Baghdad and the whole airport security detail ended up in jail.

The hijacking before that was carried out by an extremely pissed off group of deportees using the cutlery which came with the meal.

So you can introduce all the security measures that you wish, but unless they get to the level of ElAl, they will be ineffective.

Mutt.

[Hogwash]

I have been through Heathrow crew checks many times and with the exception of x-raying the crew luggage I believe them to be a waste of time.

Most of the support drivers(fuel,mail,food etc.) only have their passes checked, the vehicles are not inspected!

I often wonder what they expect to find in a pilots bag as the most dangerous weapons on board are at the end of a pilots wrist!! All this rot about penknives and the like is unbelivable - if I wanted to whack somebody I would reach for the flight deck fire axe!

[Raw Data]

Rustbucket, you miss the point beautifully. The whole point of the WTC horror was that it was committed by pax, with minimal weaponry, but a willingness to die. I very much doubt that UK security would have caught them either. They could just as easily have used "legal" knives- the thing that made them dangerous was their fanaticism, and that is not easily detectable at an airport.

All the measures we are seeing now are very much a matter of bolting the door long, long after the horse has departed the scene. Mostly it is about restoring passenger confidence (as good a reason as any, I guess). The only real defence is preventing them getting into the flight deck, and I very much doubt that any of these guys would have appeared overly suspicious at check-in or security.

I am all for security, as long as it is intelligent and sensible. Ask El Al about cockpit security if you want an example.

Finally, I really feel for the poor security staff around the UK, having to implement DETR procedures and getting abuse from everyone... let's try and be nice to them.

[What_does_this_button_do?]

I quote Raw Data

The whole point of the WTC horror was that it was committed by pax, with minimal weaponry, but a willingness to die. I very much doubt that UK security would have caught them either. They could just as easily have used "legal" knives- the thing that made them dangerous was their fanaticism, and that is not easily detectable at an airport.

Anyone remember that chap who overpowered a 747 BA crew which sent the aircraft badly out of shape to be corrected by the FO? The chap was mentally disturbed, not armed and from what I can recall was reported to ground staff before boarding the flight but declared fit to travel.

The point (I personally think) being made here is that if a security level is applied it should be applied to all and that includes airside workers, pilots, cabin crew and passengers.

first story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1092000/1 092925.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1092000/1092925.stm)

second story (including the bit about the Police let the person on the plane)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1094000/1 094419.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1094000/1094419.stm)

edited to add the BBC links

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: What_does_this_button_do? ]

[Murray_NN]

RAW DATA
Finally, I really feel for the poor security staff around the UK, having to implement DETR procedures and getting abuse from everyone... let's try and be nice to them. RAW DATA.

I cannot believe this is coming out of the mouth of a moderator!!!

RD I say again you silly man! Read carefully and slowly if you cannot comprehend this text.

WE ARE HERE FOR YOUR OWN PROTECTION AND A LITTLE CO-OPERATION FROM THE TYPES OF YOU WILL GO ALONG WAY WITH US. IF YOU DONT CO-OPERATE IT WILL BE YOU THAT WILL WALK AWAY FROM OUR POSTS PISSED OFF!!! AS YOU CLEARLY ARE.

I come to question your inteligence RD. If you are a pilot you should realise that its common sense why we take weapons off pax and pilots and many more who enter A/S.

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: Murray_NN ]

[Wino]

BJCC,

The COPS SHOULD BE SEACHED AND ALL WEAPONS INVENTORIED! in and out of the secure area.

The people that carried out these hijackings had been hiding in American for YEARS! They had wives and children here! What is to stop an accomplice from joining the police force just so that he can preposition guns in the terminals for the terrorirst? So what if a cop carries his service weapon + another concealed weapon and leaves the concealed weapon behind in the terminal?

I think that ALL security personel should go through security and inventory all weapons in and out of the secure area.

Wino

[Capt PPRuNe]

To prevent this thread going round in circles I will try and make a point that not many people have brought up. Once a person with evil intent is on the a/c then it is too late. In the case of the mass murderers of last week it has been shown that they not only perpetrated the hijack but did so FOUR times within minutes of each other.

What we have here is a massive failure of the intelligence services. Considering the time that it took to plan and set up these terrorist acts and the logistics involved it is suprising that the intelligence services, with huge resources at their disposal, failed to alert anyone about this attack. Had they had some evidence based on intelligence gathered they would have at least been able to alert the various security services to step up their vigilance but sadly this was not to be.

Having a go at the security personnel doing their job or having a go at us pilots for being subjected to what often is seen as futile, knee jerk reaction and a lack of understanding by both sides as to what really needs to be done is not going to help.

No doubt all the issues are being discussed by the appropriate groups in slightly more secure forums than this but at the same time maybe they will be looking here to see what we also think about the current systems. I just hope that common sense prevails and any new measures introduced are workable and take into account both sides of the argument we have seen here.

This one is going to be closed for now.