Kill switch for aircraft - would you want to fly one?

[LurkerBelow]

I doubt that this would make you feel any safer - quite the opposite in fact

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/the-pentagons-n.html

[Todders]

In an age of computer hackers and "information leeks" not sure how this could ever be proved to be secure enough to be implimented.

Anything based outside of the internal loop of an aircraft (and the crew)that can be used to control it in anyway is a bad idea in my honest opinion.

[SNS3Guppy]

I worked for an operation in which private aircraft were contracted through a government agency. One of the requirements was that a switch be installed to disable the aircraft to prevent it's unauthorized use. Most of us considered this an unsafe requirement. Where such installations were made, the switch itself was bypassed or disabled, and in most cases, the switches were simply dummy switches to satisfy the requirement of the contract.

The only ones who should ever have any such control are those actually operating the aircraft, and that would be only the crew.

[slip and turn]

Ah but which crew, SNS3? The one in the aircraft or the one in the Nevada desert? In these days of Predator and Reaper it surely won't be long now before someone like QiQ in UK comes up with a modification for Airbus that let's ground-based pilots in Nevada take over when the computers agree things ain't going to original plan :ok:

[ft]

A) They will never be able to prove that this is safe for the occupants of the aircraft.

B) They do not care about this, as their main objective is keeping the aircraft away from sensitive areas on the ground.

C) If you do not care about the safety of the occupants of the aircraft, here is an existing solution to this problem, which will not put occupants of aircraft not threatening a sensitive area in danger. They're called SAM missiles.

If they do implement this harebrained scheme, it is only a matter of time before someone decides that terrorism by remote control is a lot more fun as it does not involve the suicide part, which probably has a severe impact on the enjoyment of the celebrations afterwards. Oh, so it can only be used to force aircraft to steer away from certain areas? Well, then they'll have to settle for keeping any amount of transatlantic flights from reaching runways until they come down in the ocean due to lack of fuel...

For the time being, I will keep my belief in common sense prevailing and write this off as yet another attempt by some think tank to gain publicity and keep the wages coming for a while more.

[Check Airman]

What a bunch of dim-witted simpletons. The day that comes to pass, I'll turn in my wings.

[Jeff Claims]

How's about a lock on the cockpit door?

Oh, has someone already thought of that?

JC

[Fark'n'ell]

The paranoid yanks again

[overstress]

They're called SAM missiles.

Are they similar to ATM machines? :hmm:

[OutOfRunWay]

What? ATM - Anti Terrorist Machines? Im all for it! Install one at every street junction!

[cwatters]

I note the article says "they'd like to have a similar system for boats, as well" but doesn't mention trains or petrol tankers (gas trucks in the USA). Perhaps the full RFQ does. I can't help but think they are behind the curve. Crashing aircraft into buildings is so last year. I'm sure the bad guys will be looking at other methods now.