View Full Version : US rules about after landing taxing in undeclared hijacking conditions
Henry VIII
6th Jan 2007, 19:59
Hi all,
read somewhere in unofficial docs that taxing to the gate after landing in US airport with slats/flaps extended is codified as a request to police action following hijacking.
I searched the FAA website with no result.
Can anybody clarify me if it is true or not and, if yes, show reference to official docs/website ?
Tks in advance ;)
HVIII
The Sandman
6th Jan 2007, 20:05
That's what we were always told, tho that was about 18 years ago and things might have changed a bit since then!
RobertS975
6th Jan 2007, 20:15
Have never heard that before, but doesn't really make sense. It wouldn't be useful at night or in poor visibility conditions. And in general, hijacked planes do not land and attempt to taxi to the gate like nothing has happened. How would that be useful to the perps?
Leaving the flaps down to signal unlawful intervention was the procedure prior to 911. There are less ambiguous procedures in place now.
fox niner
6th Jan 2007, 20:43
O great....
In my airline it is good practice to leave the flaps/slats extended after landing in snow or on a contaminated runway. Just in case ice has accumulated on and between the flap sections, which can cause damage when the flaps are retracted.
So next time whem we land in JFK and it is a winter wonderland, We have to make a choice:
1. possibly cause damage to the flaps by retracting them in snow
2. expect a welcome-party at the gate.
:confused:
Double Zero
6th Jan 2007, 20:48
Whatever you guys do, asking in public, let alone discussing it, must be one of the dumbest things I've seen !
DZ
Thylakoid
6th Jan 2007, 20:48
That's what we were always told, tho that was about 18 years ago and things might have changed a bit since then!
Yes, I was taught the same thing in the early nineties back in Canada. Haven't come across at that since.
bomarc
6th Jan 2007, 20:54
dear international pilots
as I don't know how to fly around jolly olde or any of the other nations across the pond may I say this:
go out and buy a copy of the US AIM (aeronautical information manual)...open up to security and you will learn all sorts of nice things.
as the AIM is also available online, look up on google if you like.
we don't mind talking about it as it is free and open information . you can buy a copy of the AIM anywhere and I am sure the bad guys already have a copy!
flaps down after landing can, and I repeat CAN , mean: we are desperate and want armed intervention no matter what.
it can mean you should politely say to tower, our company requires us to taxi in with flaps down, don't think anything is wrong.
on the dc9, flaps 15 to the gate was normal, but flaps 40 would get the attention of a sharp eyed controller...not too many of those around anymore.
lrjt24
6th Jan 2007, 22:15
"on the dc9, flaps 15 to the gate was normal, but flaps 40 would get the attention of a sharp eyed controller...not too many of those around anymore."
What isn't the dc-9 or the sharp eyed controller?????:ok: :ok: :ok:
Ron & Edna Johns
6th Jan 2007, 22:34
:rolleyes: From the experts themselves, the Boeing Flight Crew Training Manuals, no less:
"To reduce the possibility of flap damage following an approach in icing conditions or landing on a runway covered with snow or slush, do not retract the flaps until the flap area has been checked free of ice debris by maintenance."
So it's a normal practice all right - for icing contamination , not hijacking! I really don't know where the latter idea came from - military? Certainly not written in my books.
Do you really think the tower/ground would even notice and potentially call the Swat team? I really don't think so....
Oh, and notice it is not just when you land on contaminated runways, but also when you conducted an approach in icing conditions - something we tend to overlook, I suspect.
bomarc
6th Jan 2007, 22:41
irjt24
good one! more dc9's than sharp eyed controllers.
and to those who don't think the cops would be called...they have been...so you all be careful.
and if you are leaving your flaps down while taxiing in America, just casually mention...our flaps are down to inspect for icing or something else equally reassuring. and remember, that's for FULL flaps not just partial flaps.
Taxing in with the flaps down could also mean someone forgot to do the after landing checklist !
But that has never happened right !
OOPS !
V2+ A Little
6th Jan 2007, 23:33
I agree with you double zero!
armada
7th Jan 2007, 00:25
:ugh: Squawk...
irjt24
good one! more dc9's than sharp eyed controllers.
and to those who don't think the cops would be called...they have been...so you all be careful.
and if you are leaving your flaps down while taxiing in America, just casually mention...our flaps are down to inspect for icing or something else equally reassuring. and remember, that's for FULL flaps not just partial flaps.
Surely this should be the responsibility of the airline, not down to individual pilots? i.e if one airline has an SOP of leaving flaps at 40 degs to indicate a requirement for armed response units, then they should communicate this with the airport/ atc in question; as you have seen from this thread, it is standard practice to leave flaps down during certain conditions, and if these pilots were concerned over damage caused by retracting the flaps/slats, then there must be methods in place to opt out from the emergency signal.
I'm not saying that using flaps to signal a security sitation is bad practice, I'm simply stating that if such a practice is in operation, all pilots should be made aware of this fact, and their respective airlines should be given the choice to be put on a list of those opting out, at their own discretion and risk. I've lost count of the amount of times I've taxied to the gate, and looked out of the window to see the flaps still extended, and not a single terrorist in sight.
Edited to add: let's not pretend that most 'secret signals' aren't well known on a public level, let alone amongst those who have the resources to bring an aircraft down in the first place, especially considering such an obvious procedure, its like hiding the bat signal :suspect: .
121,9_za
7th Jan 2007, 05:48
In SA we also do that - most of us have been taught that way. A polite : "confirm you're ops normal?" is usually all that is needed to check.:)
PantLoad
7th Jan 2007, 07:05
Leaving the flaps down, in and of itself, does not signal the request for armed intervention.
PantLoad
fox niner
7th Jan 2007, 07:49
double zero and V2 + a little:
I am just a lowly airline pilot, but I do dare to say this:
There is nothing about my job that is classified information whatsoever. Therefore I/we can discuss anything anytime on the net. That includes "secret" codes for unlawful intervention. Which turn out to be googled at will and are therefore not so secret.......
Such as squawk 7500, 7700 and flaps up/down or similar.
The bottom line is: The cockpit door stays closed. Even if they are killing off the cabin attendants one at a time in front of the camera, which I will have swithed off by then.
I don't know why eveyone's getting their knickers in a knot? I have been told that leaving flaps down can signify unlawful interference and have indeed heard controlers asking 'confirm ops normal' to guys a little slow on the after landings. Am not saying that it does signify just that it can. As to the guys saying that this topic is a security breach well hey, I'm afraid in this day and age of the internet this information is already out there. If you think that the bad guys don't have friends in the airline industry in what ever capacity and aren't feeding this and more information to them then you're living in a very sheltered environment.
V2+ A Little
7th Jan 2007, 11:51
fox niner, I agree there are no secret codes. The fact that leaving the flaps down was not know to anyone (and sounds like it is false) would imply a secret code. If it was it would be stupid to post it on here, thats all. :ugh:
DA50driver
7th Jan 2007, 11:56
It has something to do with Miami, not much snow to worry about there usually.
kansasw
7th Jan 2007, 22:17
Whatever you guys do, asking in public, let alone discussing it, must be one of the dumbest things I've seen !
DZ
Disagree. ......
Astrocaryum vulgare
7th Jan 2007, 22:29
have a look at the FAA-AIM before flying to the USA.OK, many of us fly to many, many nations around the world, I can't possibly think it's practical to look at every nation's legislation.
Silly Americans!
con-pilot
7th Jan 2007, 22:47
OK, many of us fly to many, many nations around the world, I can't possibly think it's practical to look at every nation's legislation.
Silly Americans!
Well old buddy I may be a Silly American, however, when one is in the non-airline environment, as I in corporate aviation, you better bloody well believe that I check the rules and regulations of every country I fly to or may have to fly into on any extended trip.
Now back to the subject at hand.
When I was with the United States Marshal Service flying Boeing 727s most ATC folks knew who we were and who we had as passengers. One day we had problems extending the flaps for landing and I decided to leave the flaps down after landing so maintenance could inspect the flaps and find out what the caused the problem.
We had taxied about half way back to the ramp when the local controller asked us if "operations are normal". It took a second for the meaning of that statement to hit me and we replied yes and thanked them for asking.
So, back eight, nine years ago it worked. Don't know about today.
bomarc
7th Jan 2007, 23:25
SECURITY ALERT SECURITY ALERT SECURITY ALERT:
I went to the FAA website to give all you guys the quoted info so you would know...the AIM is no longer on the website! Perhaps there were too many goodies in there. top secret goodies?
AS pilots we know what responsibility is. For those of you who can quote the AIM from years gone by, you know all about things pertaining to unlawful interference.
You know the secret code words, numbers, flaps, and even how to order a mai tai in latin ;-)...some of you even know which way to fly your triangular pattern for loss of all radio or just loss of transmitter: super big ;-)
To those younger guys and non US pilots, I guess you will have to just stop by the control tower some day and ask.
While nothing is wrong with talking about such things, the fact that the FAA has the website down is a bit disturbing...I just used it about 4 months ago (easier than typing from my personal printed copy).
so, let us ask the moderator to remove this thread and place it in a long term holding pattern for Idylwild Airport or Orchard Field. also a big ;-)
you old guys who know...good on you.
DANNY BOY, zap this thread!~
Henry VIII
7th Jan 2007, 23:51
Thank you all for the quick replay.
Tks to bomarc for the AIM suggestion. I found it here (http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/), but tonight I have no time to perform a deep search, will see in the next days.
Any other suggestion(s) are welcome.
To all other colleagues who wondered considering the winter ops environment (such as snow, ice, etc.), in my thought I presumed the management of those situations are deeply acquired by everybody. Sorry for that.
Henry VIII,
it should be written in your RM (in mine it is).
On the other hand you can always follow the suggestions above (from bomarc), have a look at the FAA-AIM before flying to the USA.
Honestly I read about the 3d topic in your company RM, which is for me an unofficial docs.
It is not present in mine and for these reason I am looking for official source(s) to propose to my company an eventual additional note explaining the situation. ;)
Ciao
HVIII
Henry VIII
8th Jan 2007, 05:42
The only reference I found on AIM is :
Chapter 6. Emergency Procedure
Section 3. Distress and Urgency Procedure
6-3-4. Special Emergency (Air Piracy)
This is the link (http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap6/aim0603.html)
No evidence about the mentioned procedure.
Regards
HVIII
bomarc
8th Jan 2007, 14:00
dear henry VIII
I too checked the latest AIM and you are quite right...the reference to the mentioned procedure is no longer there.
I assure you that at one time it was listed in the AIM along with some other things of interest to an air piracy.
I plan to call my local FAA rep and ask him what happened.
There are other ways to get this information out to the transport pilot and perhaps those methods are being used.
interesting food for thought
j
Hi all,
read somewhere in unofficial docs that taxing to the gate after landing in US airport with slats/flaps extended is codified as a request to police action following hijacking.
I searched the FAA website with no result.
Can anybody clarify me if it is true or not and, if yes, show reference to official docs/website ?
Tks in advance ;)
HVIII
The old rule was that the signal was actioned by police only in the case of an "ongoing" hijacking. "Ongoing" meaning ATC etc. already know of your situation before you land.
For normal ops do whatever you like with your flaps and there is no requirement to notify anyone (other than possibly your maintenance people!)
I am glad the rule is gone; there was so much urban myth and misunderstanding. My company SOP was recently incorrect and up here we often leave the flaps extended during slush/snow ops.
West Coast
9th Jan 2007, 01:01
"I can't possibly think it's practical to look at every nation's legislation"
Why not? Too good to I guess Do you think its ok for YOU to fly to another country and not observe its regulations.
Consol
10th Jan 2007, 19:57
Understand it means you require immediate armed intervention only after a situation has developed and the authorities are aware of it, the flaps down indicates a sudden deterioration hence need help now. (They will then send out a jobsworth to find out where the pilot hid his yogurt/toothpaste/ham sandwich and whether they are in the correct sized plastic bag). Sorry, couldn't resist it.
Ignition Override
29th Jan 2007, 05:33
Double Zero.
Well-spoken.
The amateurs (or 300-hour "wonders") have revealed themselves, again.
misd-agin
30th Jan 2007, 03:36
Why would anyone talk about any security related stuff on the net? If you have a need, and right, to know you can find the information from a qualified source.
and have indeed heard controlers asking 'confirm ops normal' to guys a little slow on the after landings
If you got a guy in a balaclava with a gun at your temple ready to unload it, you probably are going to affirm ops are normal, if you say negative I think even the dimmest terrorist will realise his secret mission has just been rumbled.