FireArms

[HowULikeMeNow]

US ALPA has petitioned the Federal Gov't so as to allow flight deck crewmembers 1. be deputized and have arrest authority (Air Marshalls) 2. firearm carrying permit.
:mad:

[B747wideboy]

It´s a scary day for CRM.

[BJBATMAN]

I also agree with arming the crew as a last resort defense. They don't allow knives in prisons anymore but people keep stabbing other people in jail. So what is the next crew going to do when the next hijacker brings on a undetectable ceramic knife. Keeping leathermens from the crew will not keep this from happeing again. Firearms fom the crew will it least keep someone from doing this again with a box cutter.

[PanicButton]

Were only talking about the cockpit crew aren't we. Handleing the firearms could be a part of the CPL or ATPL. However they could pose more problems if fore instance the hijackers get a hold of it. But then again I think we should play hardball with these guys. :mad:

[GlueBall]

Thousands of weapon toting "police pilots" with "arrest authority?" Impractical reality! It's a typical ALPA reactionary recommendation contributing to overall hysteria and aviation security overload.

What's needed is bullet proof cockpit bulkheads and reinforced steel doors with heavy locks to preclude forced entry, and revised inflight security training.

:(

[BJBATMAN]

Who said anything about arrest authority. No buddy arrests anyone for a last line of defense. If the flight crew decides they need their firearm then there should be dead hijackers. You can sort out the details later!!

[Wino]

It occurs to me that ever year I go back to recurrent and fight a fire, right next to the fire range, could be the firing range where I requal with a required score. Shouldn't take too long, we are really talking about shooting at short distances here. Using the gun every year in recurrent would demonstrate its good working order. I believe that Cops requal once a year as well, though they do practice more frequently, as do I, as there is no point in having a gun around the house if you aren't current and qualified on it.

Locked door and a gun, or NO access at all to the cockpit. One or the other.
Cheers
Wino

[GlueBall]

Just the other day I got a new "security directive" that I can no longer possess my swiss army pocket knife; but soon I should become a "pilot cop" and carry a gun? When I board the stairs from the ramp a new company ramp security officer checks my bags too. He has a portable metal detector that he inserts into crews' bags, as if we might hijack our own jet!

Aviation management attracts many mental midgets, especially in a time of crisis.

[TR4A]

A few airports here are taking your razor blades. The replaceable kinds like Trac II and Mach 3. They also took fingernail clippers and cuticle scissors.

[darryld]

In Canada the pilot-in-command of an aircraft is a Peace Officer, exactly like a police officer, justice of the peace, or warden. My understanding is that the Captain can charge persons under the Aeronautics Act for items such as unlawful interference or interfering with a flight crew. Can any Canadian pilots confirm this? Does anyone know of a PIC ever exercising this authority?

Not that this power of arrest is worth anything on a hijacked aircraft.

Don’t American pilots have this same authority?

[flyboy_33]

To my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, in Australia a pilot (CPL or PPL) in command of an aircraft according to the CAR's is awarded the same disticntion as a constable. If anything needs to be done ie restraining a passenger, than the pilot in command has the authority to do so. Does this not include making arrests on board an aircraft.

If you are really concerned about making cockpits safe from hijackings then you must seal off the cockpit from the cabin area so that human nature does not kick in. After all, how many of us, as pilots, would al;low access to the cockpit if we thought it would save our passengers lives or the lives of our crew? It is part of our nature and training to preserve our crew and passengers before worrying about our own lives. And I know that I would have done the exact same thing as any of the pilots on those a/c would have done. Tried to save my crew and passengers. Sadly as we all know this proved disaterous.

So should we be allowed guns on board, in my opinion we should be, or at least have a number of undercover crew specifically hired for that exact process. We need to protect ourselves and our crew as well as our innocent passengers.

FB

[DoctorA300]

This thread has been done a few times recently, always with same outcome. 1 group advocating the crew to be armed, and the other group havily against that senario. the one common view point is that airport security needs to be further improved.

In this thread we again see the arming crew and improved cockpit door arguments, I will not say which is the better solution, but here is my comments on them both.

1. Armed crew. Maybe a solution, has anybody advocating this option ever dicharged a firearm againt another LIVING human being, with the intend to kill. Ask any police officer or soldier, and they will tell you that it is not easy if you havn´t been mentally trained for it ei. dummys and human shaped targets.

2. Locked/Impenatrable cockpit door. This wouldn´t impose any major technical problems, the only problem would be if the hijackers started to execute Pax or cabin crew.

Let´s face it, there is no easy solution. If we made airport security 100% safe, somebody would quickly come up with the idea of standing near the flight path and shoot a hand held AA missile up your a¤&, not unlike the IRA mortar attack on Heathrow a few years back.
Brgds
Doc

[heretic]

Doc
Your second point re pax does not apply if comms from cabin staff goes thro a ground ops centre. Would need sat comms for reliability.

[Lucifer]

Surely stun/tranquilliser guns would be a far better idea.

[Vfrpilotpb]

CCTV mini cams along the length of the cabin, to allow Pic to look at what is going on, locked in cockpit if anything is going badly wrong then depresurise the cabin then whilst everyone is asleep nip out and cuff the bandits, turn to air back on and Heypresto no more bad guys, in fact fit a para drop tube and dump them out, NO MORE BAD GUYS. ;)

[GlueBall]

New reality will include passenger awareness about potential crew interference. Pilots will not leave the cockpit if cabin attendants are threatened. And concerned passengers, fearing for their own safety, will undoubtedly become involved in restraining wannabe hijackers. It's inherent survival instinct. :cool:

[Tan]

If the officials putting forth all these new improved security (?) rules had any common sense, instead of practicing mass psychiatry on the traveling public with ineffective security window dressing. They should try to show some leadership by eliminating all aviation fuel taxes as well as all airport taxes for starters. This would show that the governments has enough faith in the safety of the system to put their money where there mouth is.... We need people traveling in airplanes to pay the bills. After all, that is the name of the game….

I am also of the opinion that air travelers are way a head of the law markers on the security issue. Passengers no doubt will take collective action to correct any unacceptable fellow passenger airborne behaviour.

How to control it? A 21's century situation with no guidelines to speak off…

[Golden Monkey]

It's certainly an interesting thought but I believe it may well be true - the travelling public are now probably the single most effective weapon against future hijackers.

On Tuesday, most - at least in the initial stages where the terrorists took control -would have believed in the overwhelming historical precedent that their lives were not in immediate danger. And, of course, they also would have done exactly as ordered to save the lives of hostage cabin staff.

Now everyone's perception has changed.

I wouldn't fancy any would be hijackers chances now against 200 passengers who all believe their survival can only be assured by neutralising the threat. Of course, this may also mean public lynchings of those perpetuating air rage incidents. Not necessarily a bad thing though, that.

[RogerTangoFoxtrotIndigo]

OK to start with lets accept the fact that security at american airports before the incidents was simply appalling. im sure its changed now (i hope it has anyway) but at LAX last year i asked where i could light up and was told to go outside, which i did, and on the way back to the gate which was handling domestic as well as international flights i had to go through 1 metal detector but did not have to show my passport or a ticket :confused: i think we can all see the problem there.

off topic sorry, the point of this post was to say that a nice "airline security specialist" has just told the world viewers of a certain cable news network exactly how he managed to smuggle a gun onto a flight. simplicity itself and now in the public arena.

guys i really dont know what you do against a determined hijacker, but im not entirely sure that an arms race is the answer, but consider this, who has jurisdiction at FL 330? is the sky Marshall patrolling his beat for the chief or under the direction of the captain who of course is responsible for the safety of all on board. id check this one out with your union representatives. id say that federal law has priority but politicians have shown no appetite for underwriting aircraft & airline security up to now, which is what they would be doing, but i suppose now its a whole new ball of wax.

[OFBSLF]

Lucifer:

Stun guns or tranquilizer guns? You must be kidding. At a recent firearms training class all of us students were subjected to shock with a stun gun. We were required, while being shocked, to draw our firearm, and fire multiple shots at a target about 7 meters away. Like most of my fellow students, my shots were all center of mass. Stun guns are useless.

Any sort of tranquilizer takes quite a while to work.

One of the drills we did at the class is called the Tueller drill. The Tueller drill (created by a police officer named Tueller) is designed to demonstrate how dangerous someone with a knife can be. It takes, on average, 1-2 seconds to draw and fire two shots at a close target. A person with a knife can cover a distance of 21 feet, starting from a dead stop, in just about that time. We all tried it. My time was 1.25 seconds to cover 21 feet. Tranquilizer guns? Sorry, they would take way too long to take effect.

A colleague of mine, Anna Allison, was on AA flight 11 on Tuesday morning. Rest in peace Anna.

Jared

[OFBSLF]

Oh, btw, at a recent match I tried the US Air Marshal course of fire. I was told they must pass this test each time before they are allowed to board an aircraft. I'm a pretty fair shot and have passed several police qualification courses. I didn't pass the US Air Marshall test. I suspect they are quite good. Problem is, I'm sure we don't have enough.

Jared

[aztruck]

Gun in cockpit? Crew goes to toilet...2 unarmed bods leap into the open door and steal weapon. Hmm....
Many cops shot with their own weapons.

[Roadtrip]

To those opposed to arming pilots:

You think the events of 11 Sep would have been much worse if the pilots had been armed?